Peeping Tom...The 2006 Auditor General’s Report

Peeping Tom…The 2006 Auditor General’s Report – Part 1

Aug 11, 2008 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

I normally pay my maid a transportation allowance. I know that domestic workers often find themselves in a bind for “passage” money.

Since not having a bus or car fare can result in non-attendance at work, I have always paid a weekly travel allowance to my help.

Over the past weekend, and after having read extracts of the 2006 Auditor General’s Report in the Kaieteur News, I have begun to pay closer attention to just how my maid is reaching my home.
I have begun to monitor whether she has her own transportation.

I am pleased to report that, unlike a certain maid that offered transportation services to the military, my maid does not even own a bicycle. She, therefore, is not the person mentioned in the 2006 Auditor General’s Report.

The procurement of goods and services within the army received a less-than-flattering report from the Auditor General.

This is not the first time that procurement practices within the army have received adverse comment in the Auditor General’s Report, and I think that it is high time that the Defence Board launches an investigation into what the Auditor General had to say in his report.

It is also time that persons, whether they are still on the job or not, be held responsible for what has taken place. It is the failure of the Administration to respond condignly to reports of breach of tender and procurement procedures which ultimately causes a repeat of the same problem.

The fear of punishment or discipline is, I believe, the most important factor in ensuring compliance with existing procedures. If, however, on the other hand, persons feel that they will not be held responsible, they will allow slippages.

Therefore, I believe it is time that person or persons be held accountable for things that go amiss within the military.

I was very impressed with the disciplinary action that was taken in respect to the weapon that went missing earlier this year.

The weapon was eventually recovered. I believe that the action by the administration of the military sent a strong signal that there was going to be greater accountability for adherence to systems, procedures and performance.

The Auditor General’s Report covers a period in which a different administration was in place within the army.

This should, however, not preclude the Defence Board from launching an investigation as to who should be held responsible for the alleged breaches outlined in the Auditor General’s Report.

It is particularly worrying that, despite the repeated boasts by the Government that it is increasing the resources of the Joint Services, we are still having this unacceptable situation whereby the army has to rent transportation services from private individuals and firms.

How can any functioning army in the world justify not having enough vehicles at its disposal to satisfy its transportation needs?

Can you imagine what is likely to happen in times of war? What is the army going to do then, hire private vehicles to go to the battlefront? Which private contractor would wish to have his or her vehicle used by the military in times of conflict?

I therefore urge the Defence Board to immediately summon an audit to determine the transportation needs of the military, and from that determination, to ensure the army has a sufficiently adequate fleet of vehicles to ensure that it no longer has to contract private transportation operators.

I also urge a revamping of the internal audit systems of the military, and to place this revamped department directly under the control of the Defence Board.

It is, I believe, a more prudent step for internal audit departments to report directly to policy makers rather than to the top management.

Finally, I hope that the Commander in Chief recognizes that this recurring trend within the military, as outlined in the Auditor General’s Report, is not good for the image of the country.

I urge him to ensure that if persons are found to be at fault in respect to the findings of the Auditor General’s Report, the person or persons be given the boot.

And I also urge him to understand the thin line that separates mere negligence from criminal negligence, and to take condign action to prosecute those who may be guilty of the latter.

Latest News

Peeping Tom…The 2006 Auditor General’s Report – Part 1

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| April, 14th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Baksh half century inspires Herstelling’s 50-run victory

CARIFTA Games athletes depart for T&T

Shattas meet Botafago, Capital FC battle Milerock...

Dujon remembers Pydana – former Guyana and West...

St. Rose’s crowned Georgetown champions in...

Guyana’s Seon Bristol and Dexter Patterson...

Features/Columnists

Hope is what you rely on when you do not have a plan

Collaborative Government–Private Sector Action Imperative for a Resilient Trade Future

Politicians in houses of worship

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

Peeping Tom…The 2006 Auditor General’s Report – Part 1

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| April, 14th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]