Discrediting a professional finding

Oct 16, 2012 Editorial

Guyana is a country of contradictions. On the one hand it talks about the rule of law and on the other hand it often ignores these laws. Each government department is allotted a sum of money from the national budget each year and in keeping with the principles of good governance the department must account for every cent spent.
Verification is often done by an internal audit with the auditor being someone approved by the government. The auditor is expected to examine every receipt which is then matched against the expenditure. In this manner, the nation is assured that its dollars are properly spent.
This time around the internal auditor conducts his analysis of the national Drainage and Irrigation Authority. He then releases his findings. This becomes an issue because he does not submit his findings to the Minister of Agriculture, choosing instead to send it directly to the President.
Given the scope of corruption in Guyana and the distrust that people have for some of the people in authority causes many to bypass the established chain of command. On many occasions reports have been submitted to the chain of command and disappeared.
There have been numerous cases of statements and files disappearing in the courts. Judges decisions have also disappeared and one is left to wonder at the level of corruption in the system. It may be for this reason that the auditor in the National Drainage and Irrigation Authority submitted his findings to the President.
Having seen the audit the President involved his Agriculture Minister under whose authority NDIA falls and it is here that the problems begin. Immediately the Minister not only faults the report, he also attacks the messenger. He writes, “(It) only represent the interest of someone with a personal agenda.” How could this be when the audit deals with figures and procedures? Surely the figures are unchanging and reflect what actually was allocated to the project. But the Agriculture Minister ignores this fact. How could he fault the auditor? One particular finding of the auditor finds corrupt practices; it finds nepotism and a host of irregularities.
If the auditor finds these things then he did examine the records presented to him. However, the Agriculture Minister contends, “The NDIA wishes to make clear that the CEO, NDIA does not evaluate nor approve contracts. The CEO, NDIA cannot appoint himself as evaluator of projects as this is the work of NPTAB. All quotation matters are handled by the Procurement Department of the NDIA and all approval of contracts are (sic) handled by the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB).”
This should be the norm but in many cases it is not. Principles are breached and policies ignored. For the Minister to assert that the Chief Executive Officer does not evaluate tenders is to suggest that Ministers in Government do not make direct requisitions for funds from the Ministry of department.
Indeed, the Permanent Secretary must approve all expenditures but the records would show that in many instances even the Permanent Secretaries are unaware of requests by the Ministers. And when they find out, these very Permanent Secretaries try to correct the anomaly.
The argument is that the auditor got it wrong. Was the auditor a victim of pique? Why would he want to target the Chief Executive Officer? Unless some relative was involved in an altercation with the Chief Executive Officer or there was some direct conflict between the auditor and the Chief Executive Officer then the audit must be accepted as a fair evaluation of what was examined.
What is clear is that any auditor would be afraid to execute his duties in keeping with the law and with established principles. One can also get a grasp of why the Auditor general has been made to act for seven years. In his acting capacity he is at the mercy of the administration; he could be dismissed from the post. If he is confirmed then he has tenure; he is independent of any authority.
The ball is in the President’s court. He must decide whether he would accept the findings of the auditor or listen to the voice of one of his Ministers who has not been a paragon of good governance.

Latest News

Discrediting a professional finding

Related

Similar Articles

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

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

The Battle for Barbados: One Guyana Racing Stable faces off against...

Tyrrell breaks 12-year-old school record to claim...

Raja Pooran inspires Everest Masters to victory...

BCB saddened at the passing of the late Lennox...

Berbice Cricket Board names 15-man squad to...

Slingerz FC shines at Guyana Energy Conference...

Features/Columnists

Crowds, chaos and complaints

Why the U.S. Should Strengthen Trade Ties with the Caribbean

Guyanese leaders better learn from Ukraine

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

Discrediting a professional finding

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 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 […]