Dear Editor,
One observed Mr. Anand Goolsarran a former head of the Audit Office, before it became established as a Constitutional Agency, expressing some reservations about specified Audit Reports compiled by the current Auditor General. The commentary may leave other comparator agencies to pay more attention to the quality of accountability reports that office submits to the Public Accounts Committee – a political encounter unrepresentative of the quality of professional and analytical productivity expected of it.
Like other Constitutional Agencies the staffing structure of the Audit Office of Guyana is not exposed in the Budget, so that it is difficult for interested citizens to observe and comment on its capacity, except that it is not unknown that a significant percentage of its investigative accounting is effected by (sub) contractors – an organisational arrangement that gives pause for reflection.
For one thing, unlike most other public service the retirement age approved for employees of the Audit Office of Guyana is sixty years vis-à-vis the standard fifty-five years. Nevertheless, there must be a substantive case for succession planning. For example, does one hear of a Deputy Auditor General? What now are their respective ages – in case of unforeseen circumstances?
Sincerely,
E.B. John
