2.23 The first objective of the National Infrastructure Audit was to determine the adequacy, capacity and condition of nationally significant infrastructure, taking into account forecast growth (see paragraph 2.2). The second objective of the National Infrastructure Audit was to identify gaps, deficiencies, impediments and bottlenecks in the identified sectors as measured against expected future demand.
2.24 In place of addressing the COAG objectives for the National Infrastructure Audit, the Report identified a range of 'challenges' at a national and location‐specific level and Infrastructure Australia's response to these challenges. The challenges at the national level were: 'delivering better governance'; 'creating competitive markets'78; 'one economy, one set of rules'79, 'better use of existing infrastructure' and 'climate change.' The challenges at the location‐specific level were: 'supporting our cities'; 'boosting exports'; 'supporting indigenous communities'80 and 'supporting rural and regional communities.'
2.25 Infrastructure Australia formulated seven themes in response to these challenges which reflected their assessment of the main areas where infrastructure reform and investment should be directed. These were: 'a national broadband network'; 'creation of a true national energy market'; 'competitive international gateways'; 'a national rail freight network'; 'adaptable and secure water supplies'; 'transforming our cities' and 'providing essential indigenous services.'
2.26 In April 2010 the Office of the Infrastructure Coordinator advised ANAO that its view was that, given the data limitations and the available timeframe, the intent of COAG's terms of reference had been satisfied. More specifically, ANAO was advised that:
• there is a 'real question' as to the feasibility and utility of a national infrastructure audit in the timeframes envisaged by COAG, given the absence of a comprehensive or up‐to‐date audit of infrastructure in any Australian jurisdiction;
• the December 2008 report did not claim to have identified all relevant infrastructure gaps but, rather, included a systematic examination of policy and regulatory matters that, if left unaddressed, could cause physical infrastructure gaps to emerge; and
• the December 2008 report identified seven themes reflecting Infrastructure Australia's assessment of the main areas where infrastructure reform and investment should be directed.
2.27 In May 2010, the Office of the Infrastructure Coordinator further advised ANAO that:
The National Infrastructure Audit revealed considerable gaps in the national systems for collecting, holding and analysing the data used to inform infrastructure investment decisions. The submission process attempted to address some of these gaps, but this was not successful.
As a consequence, there are areas where Infrastructure Australia continues to work with governments and others, for example, through its strategy work on freight and ports, water, energy, public transport, asset utilisation and cities, as well as our work in reviewing planning approval systems for major infrastructure. Infrastructure Australia's work on long‐term infrastructure funding demands is also vitally important in this regard.
2.28 As part of its response to meeting the challenges, Infrastructure Australia also put forward a list of 94 specific projects for further analysis. This addressed COAG's request to complete an Interim Priority List by December 2008. The development of the Interim Priority List is examined in the next chapter.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
78 This section was analysed in the context of the energy, communications, water and transport sectors.
79 This section was analysed in the context of the energy and transport sectors.
80 The transport, energy, water and communications sectors were all considered as part of this analysis.