AI Accountable Official - Organ and Tissue Authority

Question

In response to a question on notice lodged during AE25-26 with portfolio question number SQ26-001242, OTA asserted that DTA's records were wrong, that it had appointed an AI accountable official (AO) prior to 30 November 2024 (on 7 November 2024, to be precise). The answers refer to PQN F035 for AE25-26, which responds to a question I asked DTA about which organisations had not met the AO deadline. While the documents tabled in response to question 2 of F035 would appear to concur with OTA's position, the answer to question 1, the aforementioned list of organisations DTA has, following 'final, validated compliance outcomes', determined to have not met the deadline, still lists the OTA as being non-compliant (OTA is organisation 25 on the list). As I am inclined to believe OTA over DTA on this matter: 1. As OTA knew about this answer before I did, were they aware they were on this list before it was published? 2. If YES, did OTA raise with DTA that their evidence, in this respect, appeared to be incorrect? 3. Has OTA confirmed with DTA whether their 'final, validated compliance outcomes' had incorrectly identified OTA as being non-compliant after the deadline?

Answer

Please see attached answer.

Documents

• Question with answer (PDF) (opens in a new tab)
• OTA SQ26-002737.pdf (opens in a new tab)