This audit would assess the extent to which entities’ use of the Management Advisory Services Panel supported the achievement of value for money.

The Management Advisory Services Panel (SON3751667) is a cooperative procurement arrangement managed by the Department of Finance. Such arrangements are intended to improve the quality, consistency, and efficiency of the procurement of Management Advisory Services by Commonwealth entities, while supporting entities to achieve value for money outcomes. The Panel supersedes the Business Advisory Services Panel, which ceased operation on 25 October 2022. As of 20 February 2023, there were 413 suppliers on the Panel, and all Australian Government agencies are authorised to access it.

The audit will assess the effectiveness of the Department of Health and Aged Care’s (Health’s) approach to health provider compliance, including its response to the 2023 Independent Review of Medicare Integrity and Compliance. The audit will also examine the Professional Services Review Scheme, which investigates Medicare-referred cases of possible inappropriate practice in relation to Medicare, Child Dental Benefits Schedule (CDBS) and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS).

Health has policy responsibility for Medicare, the CDBS and the PBS. Through its Health Benefit Compliance Program, the department aims to support the integrity of health benefit claims through prevention, early identification and treatment of incorrect claiming, inappropriate practice and fraud. Auditor-General Report No. 17 2020–21 Managing Health Provider Compliance found that the department’s approach to health provider compliance was partially effective, due in part to a lack of risk-based compliance planning and monitoring of compliance outcomes. The Independent Review of Medicare Integrity and Compliance (the Philip Review), completed in March 2023, made a number of recommendations to strengthen the integrity of the Medicare system and its health provider compliance mechanisms. In the 2023–24 Federal Budget Health received $29.8 million to establish a taskforce to respond to the review’s recommendations. In the 2024–25 Budget, Health received $18.1 million over four years to extend and expand the government’s response to the Philip Review.

This audit would assess the effectiveness of Services Australia’s use of enforcement powers in its child support and social security compliance programs.

In 2022–23, Services Australia delivered $140.3 billion in social security and welfare payments on behalf of the Australian Government, including facilitating $1.8 billion in child support payments. In ensuring recipients receive only the payments to which they are entitled, Services Australia has a range of enforcement powers it applies through compliance activities. These include powers to require individuals to provide information, produce documents, answer questions, and make payments (including through the use of garnishee orders).

This audit would examine the effectiveness of the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), Department of the Treasury, Department of Industry, Science and Resources and Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) in managing residual risks still in existence after the abolition of the Modernising Business Registers program, and the management of risks after registry functions were transferred back to ASIC.

In 2020, as part of its Digital Business Plan, the Australian Government announced the full implementation of the Modernising Business Registers (MBR) program to establish Australian Business Registry Services, and to streamline the way in which people register, view, and maintain business information with government. The Modernising Business Registers program was halted in August 2023.

This report will focus on key selected major Defence acquisition projects in accordance with the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA) MPR Guidelines.

Increased transparency and accountability on progress with major Defence equipment acquisitions has been a focus of parliamentary interest for some time. Beginning in 2007–08, an annual program has been established in conjunction with the Department of Defence to enable the ANAO to review and report to the Parliament on the status of major Defence acquisition projects, as set out in the major projects report. The review includes information relating to the cost, schedule and progress towards delivery of required capability of individual projects at 30 June each year, and is undertaken at the request of JCPAA.

This audit would examine the effectiveness of arrangements to establish Environment Protection Australia.

Environment Protection Australia (EPA) is an element of the Australian Government’s response to the Independent Review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) (Samuel Review). The EPA will be the national environmental protection agency, responsible for issuing permits and licenses; project assessments, decisions and post-approvals; compliance and enforcement; and assurance of the application of National Environmental Standards under accredited arrangements with the states and territories. The 2023–24 Federal Budget provided $121 million over four years (from 2023–24) to establish the EPA.

This audit would examine the effectiveness of Defence’s establishment and management of the Major Service Provider (MSP) Panel.

The MSP Agreement 2018–2026 was established to facilitate the engagement and management of large, long-term, multi-discipline and integrated work packages across the air, land and maritime capability domains. Defence selected four consortia (comprising 13 companies) as MSPs under the panel arrangements, which commenced in February 2018. AusTender data as at December 2023 indicated that the four MSPs had been awarded 351 contracts with a reported total value of $4.47 billion since the commencement of the panel in February 2018.

This audit would assess the effectiveness of the Department of Industry, Science and Resources (DISR) and the Digital Transformation Agency (DTA) in the development and implementation of frameworks to govern the use of new and emerging technologies. DISR has oversight of frameworks that support Australian industries (private sector) and DTA oversees Australian Government entities’ application of emerging technology such as artificial intelligence (AI).

The Australian Government announced $101.2 million in the 2023–24 Federal Budget to support businesses to integrate quantum and AI technologies into their operations. The investment is expected to support the creation of 1.2 million tech-related jobs by 2030, increasing local capacity and capability and driving the uptake of these technologies.

This audit would examine the effectiveness of the allocation of funding for assistive technology supports under the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), including how the NDIA assesses these supports as reasonable and necessary for each participant and manages associated fraud risks.

Assistive technology is a support category for devices, mobility aides, software, equipment, vehicle modifications or animals that assist people with disability to do things more easily, safely or independently. Funding for assistive technology under the NDIS must meet ‘reasonable and necessary’ decision criteria. In the twelve months to 30 September 2023, assistive technology accounted for 3 per cent ($1.4 billion) of annualised committed supports in current participant plans.

The audit would assess the effectiveness of the National Indigenous Australians Agency’s (NIAA’s) management of the regional network, including whether the regional network is achieving its objectives.

The NIAA administers the Indigenous Advancement Strategy (IAS). The IAS is supported by the NIAA’s regional network, which aims to position senior decision makers close to the people and communities they work with, in order to develop and implement local solutions to improve outcomes for Indigenous Australians. Auditor-General Report No. 7 2018–19 Management of the Regional Network found that the effectiveness of the management of the regional network was mixed, and the full potential of the regional network to facilitate the design and delivery of local solutions to local problems was not being maximized.