The audit focussed on the systems and processes OGTR has established for both receiving and assessing applications under the Act, and also for ensuring compliance with the statutory requirements through monitoring and inspection. The audit objective was to form an opinion on the discharge by OGTR of selected functions entrusted to it under the Act. The audit assessed the practices of OGTR against the following principal criteria: Assessment of applications under the Act: Whether OGTR has established systems and procedures for the management and assessment of applications under the Act. Ensuring compliance—monitoring, inspection and enforcement activities: Whether OGTR has established systems and procedures for ensuring compliance with the requirements of the Act. Performance management: Whether OGTR manages selected aspects of its work efficiently and effectively. The audit did not seek to form an opinion on the appropriateness of the chosen structure of the regime for regulating gene technology or the merit of the scientific judgments involved. The audit methodology included discussions with representatives from agencies that co-ordinate aspects of the co-operative regulatory regime for gene technology across Australian jurisdictions, with various other stakeholders and users of the regime, as well as with officers of OGTR, along with examination of OGTR documents and files.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether selected regulatory agencies have cost recovery procedures and practices which comply with the Government's guidelines. To address this objective, the audit assessed the management of cost recovery against the following criteria:

• regulatory agencies have clear and consistent cost recovery procedures to identify their activities and costs, and set fees and levies;
• regulatory agencies have effectively implemented their cost recovery procedures;
• regulatory agencies regularly monitor and review their cost recovery activities; and
• regulatory agencies regularly report on their cost recovery.

The objectives of the audit were to assess the Commonwealth's management of contractual rights and obligations under the Sale Agreements. In particular the audit sought to: assess the Commonwealth's management of contractual warranties and indemnities; assess DoTARS' management of each purchaser's compliance with contractual commitments to capital expenditure; and examine the effectiveness of the development and management of contractual arrangements for concessional rail passenger travel provided by the Commonwealth.

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 audit assessed FaHCSIA's management of AACAP and how the department monitors the contribution the program is making to the improvement of primary and environmental health, and living conditions, in remote Indigenous communities.

The audit examined program delivery under the 2006–2009 MoU, as well as the planning for the 2010 project under the variation to the 2006–2009 MoU. As part of the audit the ANAO considered:

• program strategy and implementation including the roles and responsibilities of the major stakeholders, community selection and scope of works (Chapter 2);
• the financial management of the program and the changing role of the Contracted Program Manager (Chapter 3); and
• performance measures, including FaHCSIA's performance reporting framework, and approach to monitoring and reporting performance against the stated program objectives (Chapter 4).

The audit focused on AACAP in so far as it relates to Indigenous community outcomes. It did not consider the program from the perspective of the Australian Defence Force capability building.

The audit assessed the Commonwealth's administration of the two major elements of the Dairy Industry Adjustment Package; the Dairy Structural Adjustment Program (DSAP) and the supplementary Dairy Assitance Program (SDA). The audit addressed the implementation and delivery of the programs, governance arrangements and the management of the Dairy Structural Adjustment Fund.

As part of its 2001 inquiry into the recruitment and retention of Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel, the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee reviewed Defence's contract with Manpower Services (Australia) Pty Ltd for trialling the outsourcing of recruiting services to the ADF. In its subsequent report, the Committee commented that the original contractual arrangements deserved further scrutiny by the ANAO. The objective of the audit was to examine Defence's management of the contractual arrangements for the provision of recruiting services to the ADF. In examining the management of the contract, the ANAO looked at the evaluations conducted at the end of each contractual phase, roles and responsibilities associated with ADF recruiting, and Defence's monitoring of contractual performance and management of risks associated with ADF recruiting.

The objective of this follow-up audit was to examine the ATO's implementation of the 20 recommendations in: The Administration of Petroleum Excise Collections (Audit Report No.17, 2001(02); and The Administration of Tobacco Excise (Audit Report No. 55, 2001(02), having regard to any changed circumstances, or new administrative issues, affecting implementation of those recommendations. The audit also aimed to identify scope for improvement in the ATO's administration of petroleum and tobacco excise. Follow-up audits are recognised as an important element of the accountability processes of Commonwealth administration. The 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 the Parliament informed of progressive improvements and current challenges in areas of Commonwealth administration that have previously been subject to scrutiny through performance audits.

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 this audit is to assess Customs and Border Protection's processing of incoming international air passengers in the primary line, in particular the extent to which: (a) systems and controls effectively support the referral of incoming air passengers who pose a risk and those carrying prohibited items; (b) air passengers presenting an immigration risk are processed appropriately; and (c) Customs and Border Protection has arrangements in place to effectively promote co-operation and information sharing between Customs and Border Protection and DIAC.