The objective of this report was to provide the Auditor-General’s independent assurance over the status of the selected major projects. The status of the selected major projects is reported in the Statement by the Secretary of Defence and the Project Data Summary Sheets (PDSSs) prepared by Defence. Assurance from the ANAO’s review is conveyed in the Independent Assurance Report by the Auditor-General.

The objective of this report is to provide the Auditor-General’s independent assurance over the status of the selected major projects. The status of the selected major projects is reported in the Statement by the Secretary of Defence and the Project Data Summary Sheets (PDSSs) prepared by Defence. Assurance from the ANAO’s review is conveyed in the Independent Assurance Report by the Auditor-General.

The objective of the audit was to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the provision of health services to the Australian Defence Force Regular forces. Audit criteria were developed which examined health services policy and strategic planning, resource management, the tri-Service provision of medical, dental and other health care, the operation of and planning for major medical facilities, health care management information systems, occupational health and safety and the supply of health materiel.

The objective of the audit was to assess the workforce planning systems used by the Australian Defence Force with a view to identifying better practice and making recommendations where appropriate to promote overall effectiveness of planning systems. The main issues were the management of the workforce planning function and determination of workforce requirements. The audit concentrated on the full-time military workforce, but also included the issue of the flexibility for military units to employ reserves or civilians where appropriate.

The objective of this audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Home Affairs’ management of its public communications and media activities.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Public Service Commission's (APSC) administration of statutory functions relating to upholding high standards of integrity and ethical conduct in the Australian Public Service (APS).

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented to the Australasian Council of Public Accounts Committees (ACPAC)

The audit reviewed the planning and management of the Australian Defence Force deployments to East Timor, including the support of those deployments. The audit focused on planning for the deployments and the role of Australia as the lead nation in the International Force in East Timor (INTERFET); and financial, personnel, logistic and other systems used to deploy and sustain Australia's military presence in East Timor.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the management of the Australian Public Service (APS) workforce in implementing the Australian Government’s COVID-19 priorities.

The objective of the audit was to assess the progress of the M113 Upgrade Project (Defence Project: Land 106), including progress in the development of operational capability resulting from the introduction of the upgraded vehicles into service. The high-level audit criteria used to assess the project’s progress and Defence’s effectiveness in administering the M113 Upgrade Project were:

• the degree to which the schedule for the production and delivery of upgraded M113 vehicles to Defence had been recovered in accordance with Defence’s response to the 2008–09 audit report and contractual requirements, as negotiated over the life of the contract;
• Defence’s measurement and allocation of the total cost of the upgrade project; and
• the development of capability arising from the upgrade project.

The audit objective was to examine the efficiency of the Office of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions' (CDPP's) case management.

The fleet oiler HMAS WESTRALIA was a key element of the Royal Australian Navy (hereafter referred to as ‘Navy') Maritime Operations Support Capability (MOSC) from 1989 until September 2006. WESTRALIA provided logistic support to naval operations and exercises and contributed to Defence international engagement through these activities. The new vessel to replace WESTRALIA is called HMAS SIRIUS and was commissioned by Defence in mid September 2006, which was concurrent with the formal decommissioning of WESTRALIA. This approach was adopted by Defence to ensure that Navy maintained a continuous afloat support capability.

This first Assurance Report on the status of selected Defence equipment acquisition projects, which has the support of the Parliament and the Government, represents a substantial step towards improving transparency and public accountability in major Defence procurement projects. It is the pilot of an annual Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) Major Projects Report, and was developed in conjunction with the DMO. It covers the cost, schedule and capability progress achieved by nine DMO projects, which had an approved budget totalling $13.535 billion as at 30 June 2008.

This report is organised into three parts. Part 1 comprises an ANAO overview and Auditor–General's Foreword. Part 2 comprises the Major Projects Report prepared by DMO, including an overview reflecting DMO's perspective on their business and on the nine projects included in the. Part 3 incorporates the Auditor-General's Review Report, the statement by the CEO DMO, and the information prepared by DMO in the form of standardised Project Data Summary Sheets covering each of the nine pilot projects.

In the next 12 months, the ANAO will review 15 DMO projects planned for inclusion in the 2008-09 DMO Major Projects Report, with the number of projects rising to 30 projects in subsequent years. The ANAO will also work with DMO to refine the approach adopted for providing assurance on each project's progress toward achieving Final Operational Capability. The ANAO will also consider the inclusion of an analysis of each project's emerging trends, as appropriate, to complement DMO's intention to provide improved analysis of project management performance regarding all projects included in the Major Projects Report.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Defence's management of the disposal of specialist military equipment.

The audit reviewed the Defence Materiel Organisation's management of the $3.43 billion Wedgetail Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) project. The Wedgetail project is to provide the Australian Defence Force with an AEW&C capability based on four Boeing 737 AEW&C aircraft and associated supplies and logistic support. At the time of the audit the AEW&C systems were still in their early development phase, and by November 2003, Defence had spent $1.107 billion on the project.

The objective of the audit was to assess the adequacy of Defence’s processes, including compliance with the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act), the Financial Management and Accountability Regulations 1997 (FMA Regulations), and relevant Commonwealth and Defence procurement requirements, to select the capability solution recommended to the Government to satisfy the requirements of AIR 8000 Phase 2.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the management of underperformance in the Australian Public Service (APS) and identify opportunities for improvement.

The audit objective was to review the effectiveness of the Department of Defence’s (Defence) arrangements for delivering selected non-platform sustainment.

Members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) have informal and formal complaint mechanisms available to them to address grievances. Initially, members are advised to seek resolution of their complaint at the lowest possible level, through the normal command channels and administrative arrangements. A member who is not satisfied that a complaint has been resolved in this manner may use the Redress of Grievance (ROG) system to submit a formal complaint to the commanding officer of the member's unit. The objective of this audit was to ascertain whether the ROG system could be refined to improve the efficiency and timeliness of processing of complaints while preserving the equity and transparency the current system provides.The Redress of Grievance system is clearly time-consuming and resource intensive. Some grievances have taken as long as four years to resolve. Some could be resolved by administrative means rather than through recourse to grievance processes. The system contains various inefficiencies that detract from its cost-effectiveness from the viewpoint of the ADF and individual members. In addition many members are unaware of the system or do not have a high level of confidence in its effectiveness.

This audit focuses on the Australian Defence Force's (ADF) Air Combat fleet's logistics support, regular maintenance and structural refurbishment. These activities are collectively referred to as fleet in-service support. The current Defence White Paper states that Air Combat is the most important single capability for the defence of Australia.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Air Combat fleet's in-service support arrangements to provide capability for air combat operations. Capital equipment acquisition projects covered by this report are limited to the Hornet and F-111 structural refurbishment projects, which aim to ensure these aircraft remain serviceable until their withdrawal from service.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Veterans' Affairs and Department of Defence's administration of rehabilitation services under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004.

Mr Ian McPhee - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the CPA Australia Public Sectore Finance and Management Conference

Audit Report No.5 1993-94, Explosive Ordnance, Department of Defence, was tabled in the Parliament in September 1993. The report was structured in three parts. The first part covered explosive ordnance (EO) issues common to all three Services; the second part focused on the management of explosive ordnance by the Navy; and the third part was a follow-up of the 1987 audit report on Air Force explosive ordnance. The report made 39 recommendations. Defence agreed to implement most of them.

It was considered timely to undertake a follow-up audit into key issues of the recommendations contained in the audit report, given the elapsed time since the report was tabled and the issues associated with public safety.

Given the significant expenditure associated with the Super Seasprites, and the problems that the Project had encountered over some time, the ANAO had commenced this performance audit prior to the Government's decision to cancel the Project. The focus of the audit was on Defence's and DMO's administration of the Project. In light of the Government's decision to cancel the Project, the objective of the audit was revised to place greater emphasis on those issues that resulted in the failure of the Project to provide the required capability, and highlighting project management lessons for major Defence acquisitions going forward.Accordingly the audit objective was to:

• identify those factors that contributed to the on-going poor performance of the Project;
• outline measures taken by Defence and DMO in seeking to overcome issues encountered by the Project, and key lessons arising from this project for the benefit of major acquisitions projects generally; and
• determine the capability and cost implications of a project that failed to deliver to expectations.

The Auditor-General responded on 21 March 2025 to correspondence from Ms Kylea Tink MP dated 28 February 2025, requesting that the Auditor-General conduct an investigation to examine the defence export permit approvals process.

The objectives of the Australian National Audit Office's (ANAO) performance audit were to: examine the efficiency and effectiveness of agencies' procurement and management of legal services arrangements; determine adherence to Australian Government policy requirements; examine the effectiveness of the OLSC's monitoring of agencies' compliance with Government policy requirements; examine the OLSC's role in assisting agencies to comply with Government policy.

The objective of this audit was to examine the effectiveness of Defence’s management of explosive ordnance by the end users of this materiel in Air Force, Army and Navy (the Services). In particular, the focus was on the effectiveness of arrangements for the oversight and physical control of explosive ordnance once it is issued to Service units.

The audit reviewed Defence’s policies, procedures, processes and inventory management systems for explosive ordnance at the unit level in the ADF, from receipt and storage through to the use or return of explosive ordnance.The audit also examined the relationship between the management of explosive ordnance at the unit level and the Explosive Ordnance Services Contract and, where relevant, the regional Garrison Support Services (GSS) Contracts.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness and value for money of Defence’s acquisition of light protected vehicles, under Defence project Land 121 Phase 4.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness to date of the Department of Defence's (Defence) planning for the mobilisation of its continuous shipbuilding programs in Australia.

The objective of the audit was to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of administrative arrangements for the provision of food to the Australian Defence Force and identify possible areas for improvement. The audit criteria addressed the adequacy of policy guidance, planning, performance information and risk management in all areas of ADF food provisioning.