Internal audit function at City Hall had been addressed in detail by consultancy

Dear Editor, It was good to have my memory refreshed by colleague John Seeram in SN’s edition of October 10, 2018, on the sensitive subject of the status of the Internal Audit Function in the Mayor and City Councillors of Georgetown.

The writer was a member of a Consultancy lasting from May 2001 to August 2002 which was required to address the following Terms of Reference.

This Consultancy responds in part to satisfying the requirements of a comprehensive

restructuring of the

with specific reference to the following key activities: Conduct an assessment of key man• agement gaps in the Mayor and City council and develop a strategy to address them. Conduct a diagnostic review of the Mayor and City Council to define its operational environment, tasks and integration requirements with a view to ascertaining whether these contribute to the attainment of the objectives of the Mayor and City Councillors of the City of Georgetown. Develop and Implement a Strategy for Upgrading the Human Resource Capability of the Mayor & City Council as a key component of restructuring the organisation.” During the exercise attention was brought to the Audit Function at the time. This was summarised as follows: • • to drive the

The issue of accountability has invited sufficient attention as a basis on which a strong case is put forward for substantive upgrading of the within the The commentary covers the range of areas which require closer monitoring and evaluation – including amongst others: - salary and wage administration, - recruitment practices, - management of overtime, - management of the Training Budget, and - system of procurement.” The financial systems and procedures recommended by the Hall Report and which have not yet been instituted are recommended for urgent implementation.

The Budget preparation falls short of optimum acceptance as the figures bear little reference to documented Work Programmes of which there is a noticeable scarcity. The Approved M&CC Estimates 2001 displayed three (3) indifferently prepared Work Programmes, each in different formats.

As a matter of interest, a summary of Recommendations by David L. Hall in 1998 included the following: • “That the Internal Auditor be directed to submit an annual of activities to be undertaken, and required to report subsequently on whether the plan was completed. That an Internal auditor become pro• active in the performance of audit duties and conduct random audits and checks throughout the City’s Departments. That the Internal Auditor become involved from a Control standpoint in the Planning of financial systems and procedures to be developed, by the city Treasurer, the Report Implementation Officer, and operating departments. That individual Internal Audit reports be submitted to the Town clerk with a • •

copy to the Chairman of the Council’s Finance Committee, and that any necessary corrective action be taken immediately. That the City Clerk ensure that all current outstand• ing audit reports are followed up and the situation corrected as soon as possible. That the Internal Auditor be formally assigned the responsibility for the development and maintenance of the City’s Fixed Asset Register, and that the necessary staff be assigned to enable the work to be completed as soon as possible.” As a consequence it was recommended that the Internal Audit Department be upgraded. An advertisement was published for an Internal Audit Advisor.

The position was filled by a Managing consultant, W.W. Lynch who was in fact a qualified accountant. It is unclear how long he served in an environment of chronic dysfunctionalities.

Mr Hall also did pronounce on the irregularities existing in the City Treasurer’s Department. His detailed recommendations however are too extended to be reproduced in these columns.

Suffice it to say that both sets of the aforementioned recommendations were submitted to the current Commission on Oct 3, 2018.