In a democracy, the Auditor- General, just like the Prime Minister or the Commissioner of Police, is a literal “Very Important Person” (VIP).
He who holds the position is responsible for his office and the “auditing” of accounts of all government agencies, state-owned entities, statutory authorities, municipal and provincial councils except those entities exempted by law.
This brief outline of the auditor general’s scope of work is something I did not makeup. That is actually how the Parliament of Fiji website puts it. So basically, the auditor general’s job is to oversee independent financial and performance inspections, known as an audit.
This inspection of Government entities is not about making politicians feel and look good in public. Also, its opinions regarding the accuracy and completeness of a government entity’s accounts is not to for fancy public relations. It is more serious and sincere than that!
The regular probe by the Office of the Auditor General (AOG) is to find out whether Government and its entities make prudent use of state resources, and if so, how much in value is used unwisely and what properties were not managed. It gives advice too on how to straighten out an improper situation that is identified.
In other words, the OAG, along with other “watchdog bodies”, established under the Constitution, helps Parliament keep a check on public officials and this system of oversight contributes to good governance and a vibrant democracy.
Technically, the legislature and the OAG are somehow required to cooperate, especially the OAG and the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, but work independently (no interference) to keep a proper check on the executive, as implementers of government’s policies. But in reality, this is not always straightforward. Differences may develop.
The audit may discover certain “uncomfortable truths” which may put certain “people” in an uncomfortable position. As a result, the working relationship between the Government and the OAG may be affected.
When this happens the opportunity to rectify a bad situation can sometimes be lost, such as what may be happening at the moment. For some time now, the Auditor-General and the OAG have been subjected to criticisms by Government. We know that on December 31, 2021, a commission of inquiry was appointed to investigate the OAG and inquire into the “conduct, operations and performance” of the office.
That was the first time such an inquiry was made by the Government on the OAG, causing many to question what the true motives were. Furthermore, this week the OAG’s work has been described as “not very good”, “lacks objectivity” and “does not carry much merit”.
Those remarks don’t seem like they were coming from a Government that is confident in the constitutional office and has faith in the crucial role it plays in maintaining a system of checks and balance in power-sharing.
“In all their audits, the organisation is always doing wrong and they are going there to find problems and not acknowledge the good being done,” Minister for Transport, Faiyaz Koya told Parliament.
The minister’s comment perhaps failed to recognise that the auditing methodology used by the AOG is aligned to international standards and best practices and that the office exists to give an assurance to the legislature, which he is a part of, on “all transactions concerning the public money or public property of the State”.
While we wait for the commission to conclude its work, we hope its report and recommendations would be objective.
We also hope it would be free from political influence and will lead to strengthening the capacity of the OAG to provide the necessary democratic oversight that would help it to effectively hold government and public officers accountable.
Furthermore, we hope the inquiry would not result in anything that could cause a potential and actual threat to the objectivity, independence and professionalism of the OAG. Independence must be preserved so that objectivity in auditing is not swayed by petty politics, self-interest and other improper influences. But if recent trends in politics is something to go by, then we can expect to see some drama unfold.
The OAG has had to work hard over the past two years when Government revenue was impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and the rage of natural disasters. Why? We all know that during a crisis, help is often needed badly and urgently.
Therefore assistance has to be released quickly to cover large cross-sections of the needy population.
This often creates opportunities for misuse. To curb this problem during such time, the Auditor-General and his staff ensure through their work that money and resources generated by donors, government and lenders are not lost to fraud, corruption, wastage and extravagance.
Their stringent oversight ensures that in the end funds are being used for their intended purpose and everyone targeted benefits. Some of the common gaps audit experts in the OAG regularly come across include nonpreparation and approval of Standard Operating Procedures, assistance released without proper needs assessments on targeted communities, improper management of the inventory of goods purchased, absence of regular compliance with critical processes and poor or no reporting.
The Office of the Auditor-General of Fiji (OAG) assists the Auditor-General to deliver against the mandate of the Constitution of the Republic of Fiji (section 151) and the Audit Act 1969.
The work of the office is also governed by auditing standards. It carries out financial audits and performance audits, and this provides independent assurance to Parliament and the public that government funds and properties are being spent and managed efficiently and effectively and following the law and applicable rules, regulations and procedures.
Additionally, it also does sustainable development assurance audits to look at how natural resources are managed. Calls have been made to “leave alone” the Auditor-General and the OAG because they were already doing a “great job”.
Former auditor general, Tevita Bolanavua, said it was the first time for a Commission of Inquiry to be selected by the Government to investigate the Auditor-General.
“I don’t see any reason why this needs to be conducted. There are other things that can be done (under) the (Audit) Act,” he said.
The opposition claimed the commission reminded everyone “of how the Fiji First weakened legislative oversight by taking the “chairmanship of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) away from the Opposition in Parliament”.
It also seeks to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government entities and ensure that the community receives value for money from government services.
It does not pay to throw a tantrum or kick up a fuss with the OAG if audits reflect badly on the government.
The focus should be on doing better next time and the bigger picture – good governance, better performance, a strong system of checks and balances and quality service delivery to the people of Fiji.
If something should be changed, we could start with better remuneration for the staff of the OAF, more auditors for efficient and timely audit services and the provision of capacity building opportunities etcetera so that there is less work backlog and the quality of work done by civil servants will contribute to better oversight and accountability, a responsible and high performing public sector, prudent use of public finances and properties, and the better management of our natural resources.
Until we meet on this same page same time next week, stay blessed, stay healthy and stay safe!
