So while most Singaporeans were caught up with the excitement over Schooling's Gold medal and the pokemon obsession, this happened in Parliament on Monday (15 Aug 2016).
Shanmugam, Low Thia Khiang cross swords on overpayment of volunteer policeTODAY, PUBLISHED: 6:40 PM, AUGUST 15, 2016, UPDATED: 1:14 AM, AUGUST 16, 2016
In Parliament on Monday (Aug 15) Workers’ Party (WP) chief Low Thia Khiang crossed swords with Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam over a lapse flagged by the Auditor-General’s Office (AGO), which found that the police had overpaid its Volunteer Special Constabulary officers for seven years. The increase in the allowance was approved by officials who were not authorised under the legislation to do so.
During the exchange, Mr Shanmugam alluded to WP’s recent leadership challenge within its ranks and the opposition party’s management of Aljunied-Hougang Town Council. Here is an excerpt:
Mr Shanmugam: “The policy intent was to increase the allowance. The ministry headquarters agreed that the allowance should be raised and approved this... This was not the case of officers making decisions to increase allowances and deliberately by-passing the minister. The officers responsible for handling the earlier approval have been spoken to about their mistakes...”
Mr Low: “The issue here is not how much we pay (the volunteers), we all appreciate their work. The issue is with the AGO’s report. First it was unlawful that officers who were not authorised to do so, approved the increase in payment. Then subsequently, the Minister decided to make it lawful… to approve, in retrospect. My question is, is this the correct way? For the Government to make an unlawful thing to become a lawful thing, an overpayment to become the correct payment, and is (this) the way to respond to AGO’s report?”
Mr Shanmugam: “I thank Mr Low for his considerable interest in the matter, and I am glad he takes such a serious view of process errors. First of all, Mr Low heard me hear say quite clearly, what we have done is according to advice from AGC (Attorney-General Chambers). There are different types of errors. First there’s process error, then there can be an error in substance. And there can be an error both in process and substance. What happened here is a pure process error...contrast that with an error in substance, which may or may not have real consequences.
For example, you have an association, and there’s going to be a challenge for the chairman, and the chairman raises some new voting members to defeat the challenge. The process is legal, but from the view of substance … is it correct? Depends on the circumstances.
Take another situation. Let’s say a group takes over an organisation, and the organisation has a lot of money. The new group appoints its friends, and sets up a structure to help vacuum the money out of the organisation… and its own accountants say in writing, despite repeated requests, the organisation did not provide us with all the critical documents relating to transactions with the friends. Assume it happens every year, and yet the organisation doesn’t do anything. That is an error both in process and in substance, and that is unlawful, and that must have consequences.
So let’s keep things in perspective. And since Mr Low is so interested in process errors… I’m sure he will be interested in errors of substance as well."
Parliament - AGO found public funds properly accounted for, no systemic lapses or fraud
Straits Times
SINGAPORE - The Auditor-General's Office (AGO) report on government agencies highlighted several lapses, but the AGO has given an unmodified audit opinion for the Government's financial statements as well as the accounts of statutory boards all along.
This means the accounts are reliable and prepared in accordance with the law, Senior Minister of State for Finance Indranee Rajah told the House on Tuesday (Aug 16).
"Public funds are properly accounted for and we know what they are being used for," she said in response to questions from Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten) and Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC).
"We have a system that is transparent and accountable, and with the Government responding to every weakness that is found," she added.
The fact that the AGO reports lapses each year reflects this transparency and accountability and is part of how a robust system works, she said.
Such a system includes a diligent and impartial AGO, agencies that willingly submit to AGO's audit, have their lapses displayed openly and seek to rectify them promptly.
Mr Liang had asked whether the lapses reported by the AGO in its report for FY 2015/2016 uncover any systemic flaws and how agencies will strengthen their management of public resources to prevent future occurrence. Mr Lim had asked whether the latest report had highlighted any repeated breach of financial regulations and what action will be taken against officers who fail to take action to rectify these breaches.
Ms Indranee said: "I can say with confidence from this year's AGO report and past years', that there is no evidence of a systemic weakness within government agencies with regard to compliance."
Most of the lapses AGO highlighted are due to individual officers not complying with procedures, rather than weakness in the system as a whole, she said, adding that the respective agencies have - in all cases - taken steps to rectify the weaknesses identified.
"It will be unrealistic to expect that there are no lapses found within the system each time a serious audit is done. With over 140,000 officers in the Public Service handling hundreds of thousands of transactions each year, human laxity or errors of judgment will happen," she noted.
"We take each and every lapse seriously, but if nothing was found by AGO, we would be very concerned about the independence and rigour of AGO's audits."
No findings of fraud, corruption or personal gain
Neither is there any suggestion of financial malfeasance, such as fraud or corruption, in the AGO's findings, Ms Indranee said.
"If there are any suspicions of wrongdoing, AGO does not hesitate to report them to the relevant authorities and highlight them in its report," she said.
The Government also has zero tolerance for fraud or corruption, and acts promptly and thoroughly to investigate such cases, she said.
Steps have been taken to rectify the lapses, including disciplining the officers responsible for them. Ms Indranee said 28 officers have been counselled or warned arising from this year's audit findings. One officer was put on a performance review process for repeated poor performance and subsequently left the organisation, she added.
To improve how agencies manage contracts, the new Building and Infrastructure Centre of Excellence has been set up under JTC this year (2016).
To strengthen procurement, since 2014, permanent secretaries and agency chief executives have been required to report to the Finance Ministry regularly with an assessment of the findings in procurement audits and their follow-up actions.
"We will continue to tackle all lapses identified each year with the same resolve," Ms Indranee added.
Can WP and its supporters honestly and objectively say that the issue over the AHPETC / AHTEC Accounts has been handled by WP in a transparent manner?
Has WP come forward to give an explanation of what the AGO report found? Where is the accountability that WP always shouts about?
Read more here:
No comments:
Post a Comment