LDFerguson
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,663
I noted in another thread that nobody has suggested holding the auditors of Fás to account, even though they have issued clean audit reports to Fás in relation to accounts that failed to disclose any internal control weaknesses or other problems.
Maybe the reason for this is that Fás is audited by the Comptroller & Auditor General, who seems to be above reproach
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=97779&page=5
I thought the whole thing kicked off because of problems with the audit especially the internal one. But wasn't it the Controller & Auditor General who discovered the procurement problems with the advertising contracts and brought it to the attention of the Tainaiste hence all the attention turning towards FAS.
The Board has taken steps to ensure an appropriate control environment exists by:
* the consideration and approval of the organisational structure
* delegating to the Director General responsibility for ensuring management responsibilities are clearly defined
* establishing procedures for reporting significant control failures and ensuring appropriate corrective action is taken.
....
The system of internal financial control is based on a framework of regular management information, administrative procedures including segregation of duties, and a system of delegation and accountability. In particular it includes:
* a comprehensive budgeting system with an annual budget, which is reviewed and agreed by the Board of Directors;
* reviews by the Board of Directors of monthly and annual financial reports which indicate activity and financial performance against forecasts;
* setting targets to measure financial and other performance;
* procedures for the control of capital investment that are in accordance with Guidelines for the Appraisal and Management of Capital Expenditure Proposals issued by the Department of Finance in February 2005.
..
I confirm that for the year ended 31 December 2007 the Audit Committee on behalf of the Board conducted a review of the effectiveness of the system of internal financial controls.
No weaknesses were found in the system of internal financial control which resulted in any material loss, contingencies or uncertainties being disclosed in the financial statements or the auditor’s report on the financial statements.
I agree completely. They are also far cheaper.Certainly not a tribunal but I do think that Gardai make better investigators than barristers.
I agree completely. They are also far cheaper.
Not quite a fair comparison there. Why directors on one side and managers on the other?I see [broken link removed] that the liquidator of a private sector building firm is attempting to make the directors personally liable for debts of €3.2M.
How would people feel about pursuing the managers of FAS personally for any expenses that were, on examination by a third party, found to be inappropriate for the job at hand?
Not quite a fair comparison there. Why directors on one side and managers on the other?
I'd say this is what LDFerguson means by "managers".director-general, assistant directors-general and directors
The questions are:
1. If the Board knew that there were significant unresolved internal control issues dating from earlier years, why did they sign off on the Statement on the System of Internal Financial Control, in the 2007 accounts, that failed to disclose the existence of these issues?
2. If the auditors knew of these issues and the contents of the Statement on the System of Internal Financial Control, why did they issue a clean audit report on the accounts including this statement?
Are you certain that C&AG auditors can NOT be reported to their professional body? Is there some special exclusion?Apparently there is an ongoing investigation in the C&AG into how FAS got clean audit reports in recent years. You are right though, there is not the same accountability for C&AG auditors as there is for private sector auditors (where you can direct complaints to the professional body). I was actually surprised to learn this was the case.
I guess the reason why a liquidator can pursue a director personally would be where there has been reckless trading, and other external parties (customers or employees) have been left short. I don't think the liquidator could pursue a director where the shareholder has been left short.
AFAIK, I don't think any 3rd parties have been left short as a result of the shenanigans at FAS. Gardai are currently investigating, and I guess if someone is convicted of an offence, they could be pursued.
I too would be most grateful if someone can answer this question.Are you certain that C&AG auditors can NOT be reported to their professional body? Is there some special exclusion?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?