The objective of this follow up audit was to examine Customs' implementation of the eight recommendations in the ANAO Report No.16 2004–05 and the two related recommendations from JCPAA Report 404. The audit has had regard to issues affecting the implementation of the recommendations and has taken into account changed circumstances and new administrative arrangements since the previous audit.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) is responsible for regulating aviation safety in Australia, the safety of Australian aircraft operating overseas as well as for regulating and administering Australia's airspace. In September 2008, the Senate Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport presented a report on the Administration of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and related matters. That report made three recommendations, one of which requested an Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) audit of CASA's implementation and administration of the regulation of aircraft operators' Safety Management Systems (SMS'). ANAO agreed to this request with the objective of the audit being to assess CASA's implementation and administration of an SMS approach to regulating aircraft operators.

An SMS is a systematic approach to managing safety, which encompasses organisational structures, accountabilities, policies and procedures. Amendments to the Convention on International Civil Aviation (commonly referred to as the Chicago Convention) made in 2006 require that contracting states regulate the SMS' of aircraft operators. As a contracting state to the Chicago Convention, Australia is required to mandate that aircraft operators implement an SMS.

The objectives of the follow-up audit were to assess DFAT's implementation of the six recommendations made by the ANAO in the previous audit. It also sought to determine whether implementation of these recommendations, or alternative action, had improved DFAT's administration of consular services. The audit focused on management processes and supporting systems for the delivery of consular services. It also reviewed DFAT's implementation of recommendations of the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee that were outstanding from the previous audit.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) completed a performance audit of the ATO's use of AUSTRAC data in August 2000, titled The AustralianTaxation Office's Use of AUSTRAC Data, Audit Report No. 7 2000-2001. It found that the ATO had used AUSTRAC data to achieve a significant improvement in the collection of taxation revenue. The ANAO considered that the ATO could build on this success by using AUSTRAC data more effectively at both the strategic and operational levels. The audit made six recommendations. The ATO agreed with all recommendations. The objective of this follow-up performance audit was to assess the ATO's progress in implementing the recommendations of Audit Report No 7 2000-2001, The Australian Taxation Office's Use of AUSTRAC Data.

The objective of this follow-up audit was to review FaCSIA's progress in implementing the recommendations of Audit Report No.17 1999–2000. The focus was whether FaCSIA had maintained or improved its oversight, coordination and administration of the CSHA for both the 1999 CSHA and the 2003 CSHA, in line with the recommendations and findings identified in the previous ANAO audit.

This audit is the first time that the ANAO has looked at superannuation payments to independent contractors. The audit examined whether Commonwealth organisations were identifying contracts that were wholly or principally for the labour of the contractor and meeting statutory superannuation obligations under the Superannuation (Productivity Benefit) Act 1988.

In view of the large amount of public money being paid to the states in GST revenue, the objective of the audit was to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of processes and procedures used by Treasury in making payments of GST revenues and associated amounts to the States.

The audit objective was to assess whether Australian Government agencies were effectively controlling the use of credit cards for official purposes.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of CSIRO’s development and administration of selected National Research Flagships. In assessing CSIRO’s performance, the ANAO examined whether:

• mechanisms were in place to develop and implement the Flagships, within the context of the broader CSIRO change program;
• governance arrangements for Flagships incorporated sound oversight, planning and reporting arrangements; and
• periodic review activities were used to assess and improve the operation of the Flagships.

The objective of this follow-up audit was to assess the extent to which DVA had implemented the recommendations from the original audit during the period 2002–06, including in its preparation of the IT outsourcing contract which will operate from 2007.