This report relates to the fourth audit of Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act) agencies' compliance with the Order of the Senate for Departmental and Agency Contracts, (the Senate Order) to list, on the Internet, contract details for the reporting period 4 February 2002 to 3 February 2003. The audit was conducted in accordance with the Senate Order request for the Auditor-General to undertake twice-yearly examinations of agency contracts listed on the Internet, and to report whether there had been any inappropriate use of confidentiality provisions. The objectives of the audit were to assess agency performance in relation to compiling the Internet listings required by the Senate Order and the appropriateness of the use of confidentiality provisions in Commonwealth contracts.

Recent performance audit priority for the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government portfolio has been directed at the administration of funding for land transport. Accordingly, this audit is one of a series ANAO is undertaking of land transport funding programs. Four audits have already been completed, namely:

• ANAO Audit Report No. 31 2005–06, Roads to Recovery;
• ANAO Audit Report No. 45 2006–07, The National Black Spot Program;
• ANAO Audit Report No. 22 2007–08, Administration of Grants to the Australian Rail Track Corporation; and
• ANAO Audit Report No. 29 2008–09, Delivery of Projects on the AusLink National Network.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) administration of the veterans’ children education schemes.

The audit objective was to examine the effectiveness and efficiency of ASIC's implementation of Australian financial services licences. In particular, the audit examined ASIC's planning for the introduction of financial services licences; the roles of the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) and ASIC in defining the effective scope of licensing; ASIC's assessment and processing of licence applications; and ASIC's supervision of licensees.

The audit objective was to assess whether the early stages of DIAC's preparations for the re-tendering of the detention and health services contracts were consistent with sound practice. The audit focused on governance arrangements, in particular the recordkeeping arrangements, roles and responsibilities of personnel, expert advisors and the probity auditor—matters raised in the previous audit report. The audit did not examine the RFT, which is not due to be issued until April 2007.

The objectives of this follow-up audit were to:

• examine the ATO's implementation of the ten recommendations in The Australian Taxation Office's Management of its Relationship with Tax Practitioners (Audit Report No.19, 2002–03), having regard to any changed circumstances, or new administrative issues, affecting implementation of those recommendations; and
• identify scope for improvement in the ATO's management of its relationship with tax practitioners.

Follow up audits are recognised as an important element of the accountability processes of Commonwealth administration. Parliament looks to the Auditor General to report, from time to time, on the extent to which Commonwealth agencies have implemented recommendations of previous audit reports. Follow up audits keep Parliament informed of progressive improvements and current challenges in areas of Commonwealth administration that have previously been subject to scrutiny through performance audits.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence effectively managed the procurement process for services related to the recruitment of personnel to the ADF and the introduction of a new service provider.

The audit objective was to assess whether agreements between Australian Government (Commonwealth) agencies reflect sound administrative practices. To meet this objective, the audit reviewed current government policy and a range of better practice guidelines, conducted interviews with agencies and examined cross-agency agreements, to formulate suitable audit criteria and subsequently develop better practice principles.

The audit examined the financial management of all Special Appropriations in the period 1998-99 to 2002-03, with the exception of those related to Special Accounts and those administered by Government Business Enterprises. The audit objectives were to: identity all Special Appropriations and ascertain which entities are responsible for their financial management and reporting; and assess entities' financial management and reporting of Special Appropriations against the Commonwealth's financial management and reporting frameworks.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether the property management function, including the management of leases, was being performed efficiently and was providing an effective level of support for the delivery of the organisation's services (outputs). The audit evaluated property management policies and practices across the following dimensions:

• planning and control;
• business processes and practices; and
• information and performance management.

Within each of these areas, a series of desirable proceses and controls (described as the evaluation criteria) were developed to assist in the assessment of each organisation's performance.