It is refreshing to read Nation journalist Wade Gibbons exposing the Auditors General Report. Perennially, just like the 11-Plus Examination the public engages in the debate about the reported irregularities inflicted by the the various government departments on the taxpayers of Barbados. What will make this year any different is the 64 thousand dollar question.
Just last week BU blogged about a few of the eye-raising findings delivered by Auditor General (AG) Leigh Trotman. It is no secret that BU has been very critical of the office of the AG since coming into existence. While we might agree that the governance of Barbados through the years appears to have benefited from a good civil service, one startling observation has been its inability to visibly discipline itself. How many civil servants have been suspended, fired or any action taken as a result of gross incompetence exposed by the AG over the years?
Perhaps what has made the Auditor General’s Report 2008 so interesting is the fact that Nation journalist Wade Gibbons has encouraged AG Leigh Trotman to vent his frustration by making the following statement:
In an exclusive interview with the SUNDAY SUN, Auditor General Leigh Trotman said the offices of the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP), the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and the Director of Finance (highlighted by BU) had the authority to bring people to account where there was evidence of wastage or dubious usage of state funds.
Trotman said his office could only investigate and report on the examination of the accounts of the ministries and departments of Government, and of other financial statements and accounts required to be audited.
“There is that three-prong course of action, and once they are working properly, then there is no problem. But sometimes they do not work properly and it can be frustrating.
“Sometimes I investigate these matters and do not get proper responses and these are serious matters. People need to take Government resources and their responsibilities more seriously,” Trotman asserted.
He explained that information was sent to Parliament and the PAC was supposed to meet and “take it from there”. He noted data was also sent to the Director of Finance and he had the authority to “surcharge people” if he determined there were instances of wastage.
Trotman indicated that if there were any suggestions of fraud or other criminality discerned from the Auditor General’s Report, the DPP had the authority to initiate an enquiry.
Each authority is privy to the annual Auditor General’s Report.
“There is general consensus that something has to be done. How we go forward from here, I am not too sure that we know how to go forward. But we concede that something has to be done. It just cannot keep going on like this all the time,” he said.
Over the years the Auditor General’s Report has drawn attention to several cases where millions of dollars have been misappropriated. In many cases, there has been no explanation from within the relevant ministries as to why substantial sums have been used without compliance to financial rules.
The construction of the Vauxhall Senior Citizens Village is among several projects where monies have been mysteriously utilised in the absence of corresponding paperwork.
The office of the Auditor General has not been able to locate tendering documents for this project started under the Ministry of Social Transformation in 2002 and completed in 2004.
The contractor was paid $2.9 million, which was $700 000 more than had been awarded under his contract.
During the 2005/2006 financial year, $785 000 went into the pockets of some person(s) working under the aegis of the Ministry of Health without “physical documentation” or any evidence that any goods or services were supplied in exchange for the money.
In 2006 the Ministry of Public Works and Transport paid out over $1 million to a company for roadwork that was not done.
Yesterday Director of Finance Grantley Smith declined comment relative to surcharging people, citing his position as a civil servant with respect to making public comments. Efforts to reach DPP Charles Leacock were unsuccessful – Nation Article
AG Trotman was very deliberate by pointing to three government offices who have had the authority to follow through on the findings of the AG’s annual reports. It seems to us that the microscope should now be turned full scope on these three watchdog government offices. It is interesting to note that the Director of Finance cited the Secrecy Act to avoid comment on the matter. If these three offices appear to be unwilling and or impotent to follow through on the AG’s audit exceptions, and the DOF is protected from speaking to the Fourth Estate, what options does the PEOPLE have in this matter? It is the taxpayers who continue to be shafted!
We have blogged about the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) before, the Director of Finance seems to have escaped our eye until now. What is clear to BU based on the knowing assessment of the AG is the unwillingness, and should we say conspiracy of the watchdog agencies to effectively and efficiently execute their jobs. Not surprising is the observation that their inaction has straddle different governments and different incumbents in the respective offices thus making the problem endemic.
BU family member Bush Tea was damning in assessing the comments issued by the AG. Whatever happens the lie has been exposed and Prime Minister David Thompson has been given a chance to dismantle the Old Boys network.
Is he game?
The blogmaster invites you to join and add value to the discussion.