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 this performance audit was to assess the effectiveness of the conduct of the first National Infrastructure Audit and development of the Infrastructure Priority List.

The objective of this audit was to assess key aspects of the establishment and administration of HIP by DEWHA as well as the transition of the program to DCCEE. All phases of the program were examined with particular emphasis for Phase 2 being given to:

• program design and implementation;
• registration and training of installers;
• payment of rebates; and
• the compliance strategy underpinning the program.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the administration of specific climate change programs by the departments of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts and Resources, Energy and Tourism. In undertaking this audit, particular emphasis was given to the implementation of good administrative practice and the extent to which the program objectives were being met. The audit followed four lines of inquiry:

• development of program objectives and assessment of program risks;
• assessment and approval of competitive grant applications;
• assessment and approval of rebate applications; and
• measurement and reporting of program outcomes.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented to the Australian Society of CPAs, Canberra

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations’ (DEEWR) role in the delivery of the Children and Family Centre (CFC) component of the National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Early Childhood Development (IECD NP).

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.

The objective of the audit was to examine how effectively Health manages the risk of PBS drugs not being used according to PBS subsidy conditions. The audit examined two areas: during listing, how Health identified and implemented measures to decrease the risks of PBS drugs being used outside subsidy conditions; and following listing, how Health confirmed that usage and expenditure on PBS drugs was consistent with estimates. The report examines selected approaches used by Health, which have evolved in recent years, to manage the risk of PBS drugs being used outside subsidy conditions. The report also acknowledges and describes the role of the expert committees. The scope of the audit was limited to PBS drugs for which Health pays a subsidy. The audit did not examine Health's role in educating consumers, prescribers, and other health professionals, or the implications of the Australia–United States Free Trade Agreement for the PBS. Additionally, the ANAO did not form an opinion on the success of Medicare Australia's compliance role. To form an opinion against the audit objective, the ANAO interviewed Health personnel, committee members and stakeholders, examined relevant documents and files, analysed drug usage and expenditure data, and attended a number of committee meetings. To assist the audit process, the ANAO selected a sample of eight drugs. The drugs were selected due to their high cost to the PBS and/or high usage, or because the drug has had a particularly interesting PBS history. The sample is not representative of all drugs on the PBS. In 2004–05, 15.3 million prescriptions were written for these eight drugs, with the Government subsidy totalling $1.05 billion.

The objectives of the audit were to:

• determine the extent to which government entities complied with the requirement to publish and maintain documents online that were presented to the Parliament;
• evaluate selected government entities' policies and practices regarding online publishing; and
• assess AGIMO's policy and guidance in support of online publishing.

To address this objective the audit was conducted in three parts. Firstly, we reviewed a sample of papers tabled between 2000 and 2008 in order to assess their availability online. Next, we examined the online publishing practices of five government entities. These were the: Australian Federal Police (AFP); Department of the House of Representatives (DHR); Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government (Infrastructure); Department of the Treasury (Treasury); and National Archives of Australia (NAA). Finally, we reviewed AGIMO's role in supporting government entities in their online publishing practices.

The issues examined by the ANAO were considered on two levels. First, legal and ethical processes that focus on whether there are any impediments to the Government and public service implementing the CEIP in the way they have. The public interest issues turn largely on the question of whether the CEIP was for Government or party-political purposes. The other level on which these issues were considered is that of public accountability and the way in which decisions to spend public money are made. In turn, these issues raise questions about the relationship between, and authority of, the Government and Parliament. They may also involve consideration of what might be regarded as proper or responsible conduct by governments and the public service.