Dear Editor,
The opposition parties, APNU and AFC, have over the past two weeks since the decision of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on June 25, have been criticising the PPP/C for supporting the recommendation of the auditor general (AG) in the appointment of several staff. The opposition parties have raised issues of; competence with respect to most of the staff, and conflict of interest as it pertains to the appointment of Ms Geetanjili Singh.
Also the PPP/C has been accused of railroading the appointments because at the time of the decision, on June 25, the government had a majority on the PAC.
The opposition parties have been crying foul for almost everything, even decisions which have merit and reasonableness, as in the case of the recent appointments in the auditor general’s office.
It is important that there be an appreciation of the process for the appointment of staff. The Audit Act gives the auditor general the power to appoint staff on the approval of the Public Accounts Committee. The PPP/C has been most patient in terms of these appointments. The matter has received the attention of the PAC during the Parliament, when the PPP/C had an absolute majority on the PAC. A majority which it could have exercised, whatever way it wished during that time, especially as the auditor general had recommended these very appointments. The PPP/C members looked at all the options and gave careful recommendations to all comments and observations.
In December, 2010, the auditor general made the very recommendations, with the exception of two staff, who have since retired. The 2012 PAC was asked to consider this again and at its meeting of on June 18, consideration started, this was scheduled to be continued on June 25. There could be no issue of railroading of the decision; the PPP/C could have done this since 2011 had it choose to so do.
The Policy Manual which is used by the auditor general’s office and of all the documentation which we have seen, none speak to the issue of having the ability to sign off on Audited Accounts as a criterion – no ACCA, CPA or similar qualification is the sole option. Degree and Diploma in Accountancy and years of experience are equivalent qualifications. These staff all meet what was presented to the PAC on June 25. Ms Singh meets any of the qualifications that are in the job specifications. In addition, the overwhelming majority of the staff have been acting for years in the substantive position which they will now be appointed. So competence could not be a reason to deny these appointments.
The sole reason that the opposition has for now objecting is that they are against Ms Geetanjili Singh getting a substantive appointment in government. Conflict of Interest they have raised, because she is the wife of the minister of finance. No minister is the accounting officer of any ministry or government entity. Accounting officers are the ones who spend the money and must comply with the rules and procedures that are set out in the national protocols. They are beholden to the laws and rules and not to the ministers.
There are enough checks and balances in the system to deal with a conflict of interest, while the AG and his office is under the general direction and supervision of the PAC not the minister of finance, as under the days of the PNC.
The staff that have been approved, by the PAC, to be appointed have already proven themselves as competent and professional, the PAC must concentrate its efforts on ensuring that they continue to discharge its responsibility rather than destroying and denigrating the staff for selfish political reasons.
Yours sincerely,
Manzoor Nadir