This follow-up audit reviewed the operations of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) which is responsible for ensuring the sustainable use and efficient management of Commonwealth fisheries resources. The objective of this follow-up audit was to assess the extent to which AFMA addressed the issues that gave rise to the recommendations of ANAO Report No.32 1995-96, and the related recommendations of the House of Representatives Standing Committee Report 1997, that were supported by the Government.

The follow-up audit focussed on the key issues identified in the recommendations and grouped these in the themes of:

• strategic and performance management;
• management of the advisory process;
• implementation of fisheries management methods;
• managing AFMA's environmental responsibilities as they relate to Commonwealth fisheries
  management;
• compliance, monitoring and enforcement responsibilities; and
• management of information and research.

The purpose of the audit was to examine the environmental management mechanisms in place across some of the major Commonwealth land management and oversighting entities. In particular, the audit examined Commonwealth environmental management practices to identify current strengths and weaknesses, and provide a framework and direction for the adoption of better practice and continuous improvement. The audit has not been designed to judge past Commonwealth performance using current environmental standards and practices. Rather, the audit focused on encouraging the development of better practice by illustrating the implications and lessons learned from past and present practices.

The objective of this audit was to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the Commonwealth's management of the Great Barrier Reef as implemented by the Authority. This audit was undertaken because of the environmental significance of the Great Barrier Reef Region; its growing economic importance; recent changes to the Authority's budget arrangements; and because the Authority had not been subject to a performance audit since its establishment approximately 20 years ago.

The Department of the Treasury (the Treasury) manages Australia's relations with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and various development banks. As of
30 June 2006, the Treasury's administered assets in the IMF and other international financial institutions totalled A$7.1 billion. Liabilities totalled A$4.8 billion. In addition to the liabilities of A$4.8 billion, there were contingent liabilities of A$7.3 billion, comprising uncalled share capital subscriptions.

In October 2002 a performance audit of the Treasury's management of international financial commitments (ANAO Audit Report No.10 of 2002–03 Treasury's Management of International Financial Commitments) was tabled in the Parliament. This audit is a follow-up to that audit. The objective was to assess the progress made by the Treasury in addressing the four major audit findings and two recommendations of the 2002 audit report.

The management of Australia's overseas posts has not previously been scrutinised by the ANAO from a performance perspective. This audit is the first in a series planned to examine different aspects of the administration of Australian representation abroad, focusing particularly on DFAT and Austrade, as the agencies responsible for managing almost all overseas posts.

The diversity and complexity of issues at overseas missions of different sizes mean that posts generally cannot be treated as if they were all the same. This audit concentrated on small and medium-sized posts. The findings and conclusions should, therefore, not be regarded as automatically applicable to large posts.

Over the past few years, the Auditor-General has conducted three audits of corporate planning and two audits of annual performance statements. This edition of audit insights examines the findings from these reports and discusses key learnings that are relevant for all Commonwealth entities.

The objective of this audit was to form an opinion on the Australian Research Council's (ARC's) management of research grants. To achieve this, ANAO centred the audit around the following aspects of ARC's grants administration: governance and structure, particularly the roles and responsibilities of those parties involved in administering ARC's grants (Chapter 2); the processes for assessing and selecting ARC grants (Chapter 3);post-award management of grants under the Funding Agreements (Agreements) between ARC and those universities that receive and administer the ARC grants to researchers (Chapter 4); and ARC's monitoring of its grant programs for management, performance improvement and reporting (Chapter 5). In its assessment, ANAO considered ARC's compliance with relevant sections of the Australian Research Council Act 2001 (ARC Act) and the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act). The assessment also took account of the ANAO's Better Practice Guides, particularly the Better Practice Guide—Administration of Grants. The audit focused mainly on ARC's administration of Discovery Projects, the largest scheme in ARC's National Competitive Grants Program (NCGP).

This performance audit is the first property management audit that the ANAO has conducted since the FMA Act came into effect in 1997, with the associated devolution of responsibility to agency heads. The audit included coverage of office accommodation currently leased in Australia from the private sector. This office accommodation was housing the functions and activities of clerical, technical or professional staff, including conference and meeting rooms and ministerial suites but excluding basements, car parks, theatrettes, and cafeterias.

The audit objective was to examine the efficiency of the Office of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions' (CDPP's) case management.