Education can’t explain R6bn spend flagged in AG report

THE department of education has failed to provide supporting documentation for its financial expenditure during the 2016-17 financial year.

This was revealed in the recent Auditor(AG) report, where the department of education was flagged as the only provincial auditee to obtain a qualified audit opinion – the worst audit outcome in the province – in the 2016-17 period, which ended on March 31.

The department earned the same outcome in 2015-16.

Education bosses – including MEC Mandla Makupula, superintendent-general Themba Kojana and deputy directorRay Tywakadi – were yesterday summoned to the province’s headquarters in Bhisho by the standing committee on public accounts (Scopa) to account for the damning report.

However, the sitting had to be postponed because the officials failed to come up with satisfactory answers.

In the report, Eastern Cape auditorgeneral Sithembele Pieters stated he was unable to obtain sufficient audit evidence for goods and services as supporting documents were not provided to ascertain if goods and services were received.

Consequently, it was difficult to determine whether any adjustments to goods and services to the amount of R2.77-billion was necessary.

Pieters further stated that he was unable to get sufficient appropriate evidence to confirm the R784.3-million irregular expenditure incurred.

Due to the lack of the evidence, the AG stated, he was also unable to determine whether any further adjustments to the irregular expenditure balance of R2.4-billion was necessary.

Scopa chairman Max Mhlathi said the department’s failure to produce supporting documents was a major problem.

“To us this means that you are hiding some information.

“Instead of moving forward we are moving backwards,” said Mhlathi.

He said had it not been for the leeway displayed by the AG towards the department, it would again have gone under national administration.

After three hours of caucusing by the Scopa members, the delegation from the department of education was let into the room where a series of questions were posed to them. Questions included:

● Why there was an under-spend on conditional grants;

● Why were there spending; and

● Whether the department was still under section 100 administration.

The department is now expected to deliver detailed written replies by a deadline still to be decided. unauthorised