On 9 May 2006, the Auditor-General advised the then Minister for Transport and Regional Services that he would undertake a performance audit and that the specific audit objectives and approach would be established once officers of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) had the opportunity to undertake preliminary enquiries with senior staff in Airservices Australia and the Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS). On 31 May 2006, the Auditor-General designated a performance audit under Section 18 of the Auditor-General Act 1997 (Auditor-General Act). The objectives of the performance audit were to: examine the development and administration by Airservices Australia of its contracts with the Solomon Islands Government for upper airspace management; assess the regularity of payments made under the contracts and steps taken by Airservices Australia in respect of any irregularities; and make recommendations for any improvements in the processes employed by Airservices Australia in developing and administering these and similar contractual arrangements.

In 1997, and subsequently in 1999, the Australian Government introduced two major spending packages with a total value of almost $1 billion. These spending packages were designed to address the challenges posed by the issue of climate change and to meet Australia's domestic and international commitments. Since its inception in 1998, the Australian Greenhouse Office has been responsible for the implementation of greenhouse related programs from these two major spending packages. The objective of the audit was to examine and report on the administrative efficiency and effectiveness of seven major programs administered by the Australian Greenhouse Office.

The Commonwealth electoral roll is managed by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) and lists the names and addresses of people entitled to vote in federal elections. The objectives of the audit were twofold. The first objective was to provide an opinion on the integrity of the electoral roll, for the purpose of the audit, integrity was defined as accuracy, completeness, validity and security. The second objective was to examine the effectiveness of the AEC's management of the electoral roll in ensuring the roll's integrity.

The objective of the audit, in examining the construction of the CIIDC, was to assess:

• the adequacy of the planning and delivery processes for the project;
• the value-for-money achieved in the delivery of the project, including with regard to the suitability of the centre for its intended purpose; and
• the extent to which the Public Works Committee Act.

The audit objectives were to examine the extent to which selected TSB2 and TSI Response programs: are achieving or had achieved their objectives; and had been administered effectively by DCITA according to better practice principles. To evaluate this aspect, the audit assessed DCITA's compliance with the better practice principles outlined in the Administration of Grants Better Practice Guide (May 2002) produced by the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO). There are 19 separate principles covered under the broad areas of: Planning for effective grant programs; Selecting projects; Managing and monitoring funding deeds; and Evaluating and reporting grant program performance.

The objective of this audit was: to form an opinion on the adequacy of selected agencies' approaches to monitoring and evaluation of government programs and services delivered on the Internet; and to identify better practices and opportunities for improvement. In order to achieve this objective, the audit examined the websites and Internet-delivered services of five agencies.

This second audit report relating to SMSFs examines the effectiveness of the Tax Office's approach to managing SMSF compliance risks. Specifically the ANAO examined the processes the Tax Office uses to:

• identify the risks relevant to SMSFs not complying with their obligations under the SISA, including members accessing their superannuation early;
• mitigate SMSF compliance risks; and
• administer fund wind-ups.

The Age Pension is a social security income support payment available to Australian residents and eligible Australians residing overseas who have reached Age Pension age and whose income and assets are under certain limits. In 1999-2000, approximately $14 billion was paid to approximately 1.7 million Age Pension recipients. Payment of Age Pension is made under the Social Security Law and in accordance with the Guide to the Social Security Law prepared by the Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS). FaCS has contracted Centrelink under a Business Partnership Agreement (BPA) to administer the payment of Age Pension to eligible customers. The objective of the audit was to assess the extent to which new claims for Age Pension had been assessed in compliance with the legislation and other relevant guidelines developed by Centrelink, and whether Centrelink employed appropriate mechanisms to help ensure such compliance. In particular, the ANAO sought evidence with respect to: payment at the right rate, from the right date, to the right person with the right product, for new claims assessed during the audit sample period (that is, in accordance with the working definition of accuracy within Centrelink); the accuracy of Centrelink?s own reporting on compliance, as reported to FaCS under the BPA; and the application of appropriate mechanisms to help ensure such compliance.

This is the first of two audit reports concerning the Tax Office's administration of SMSFs pursuant to the provisions of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993.
This audit report examines the efficiency and effectiveness of the Tax Office's approach to regulating and registering self managed superannuation funds. Specifically the ANAO examined the:

• Environment in which SMSFs operate, including the Tax Office's regulatory roles and responsibilities;
• Tax Office's governance of its SMSF regulatory role; and
• Systems, processes and controls the Tax Office uses to register SMSFs, and enforce the lodgement of fund income tax and regulatory returns.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of DEEWR's administration of Job Network outcome payments.