Our staff add value to public sector effectiveness and the independent assurance of public sector administration and accountability, applying our professional and technical leadership to have a real impact on real issues.
The audit objective was to assess whether the Australian Electoral Commission appropriately established and managed the contracts for the transportation of completed ballot papers and the Senate scanning solution for the 2016 Federal Election.
The objective of this audit was to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the Australian Electoral Commission’s implementation of those recommendations relating to improving the accuracy and completeness of the electoral roll and other matters from Audit Report No.28 2009–10 that have not previously been followed-up by the ANAO.
The objective of this audit was to examine whether the Australian Postal Corporation (Australia Post) is meetings its Community Service and International obligations efficiently and the effectiveness of Commonwealth shareholders in monitoring value for money.
The audit reviewed the use and operation of performance information in service level agreements between Centrelink and three agencies; the Department of Social Security, the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs and the Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business. The objective of the audit was to establish whether the performance assessment framework specified in the agreements enabled the adequate assessment of achievements under purchaser/provider arrangements entered into by DSS, DEETYA and Centrelink.
The objective of the audit was to continue to examine the progress of the implementation of the annual performance statements requirements under the PGPA Act and the PGPA Rule by the selected entities. The audit was also designed to:
provide insights to entities more broadly, to encourage improved performance; and
continue the development of the ANAO’s methodology to support the possible future implementation of annual audits of performance statements.
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.