A proposed law which will see the creation of a National Audit Office faces another delay after members of the Montserrat Legislative Assembly expressed concerns over its independence.
On 30 April, the National Audit Office Bill 2024 went through a second reading and committee stage before being deferred to a committee of the house for review.
The apparent lack of progress was a source of frustration for several members of the assembly, with others supporting the separate discussion to allow for a unified decision.
Attorney General Sheree Jemmotte-Rodney presented the bill to members of the assembly which she said had gone through “much discussion, much review, much update”.
She explained that the Montserrat constitution stipulates that the legislature must by law make provisions for the establishment of an independent National Audit Office.
When established, this will have the power to investigate government functions and determine if resources are being used appropriately.
Resolved issues
Since the constitution came into force in September 2011, there have been numerous attempts to have a National Audit Office Bill approved by the assembly without success.
“It is hoped that all of the issues have now been resolved, and that the National Audit Office Bill before the house can be approved,” the attorney general said.
Jemmotte-Rodney told members that according to the bill, the National Audit Office will remain part of the Government of Montserrat’s structure.
She then read through the clauses of the bill which included stipulations such as the head of the office being the auditor general and the governor-appointed staff being public officers.
Staff are restricted from engaging in activities that may constitute a conflict of interest, interfere with their performance or prejudice the operation of the office, the bill reads.
Economy, efficiency and effectiveness
The auditor general’s duties include making inquiries and conducting investigations on behalf of the Legislative Assembly as they consider necessary, Jemmotte-Rodney said.
These will determine whether resources have been used with proper regard to economy, efficiency and effectiveness.
The auditor general must submit to the Legislative Assembly an annual report on audits undertaken – which must also be made available to the public.
The annual reports can detail any instance in which the office did not receive information, reports or explanations as requested.
“Or, for example, information on assets acquired, administered or otherwise held that has not been adequately safeguarded or accounted for,” the attorney general said.
The auditor general can also submit a special report if the matter is deemed urgent, which can include recommendations on accounting or management control systems, the bill says.
‘Against the constitution’
During an hour-long debate, members of the Legislative Assembly voiced their ongoing concerns about the content of the bill.
Opposition leader Paul Lewis said that when the bill came to the house for the first time the idea was to make the national office independent, as written in the constitution.
“It doesn’t seem like that’s the state that this bill is now coming back to this house,” he said, and asked if the government is now “going against the constitution”.
“I would prefer to see the National Audit Office independent, that way we would see true transparency, accountability and a practice of good governance,” Lewis said.
He told members that he would be voting against the bill.
Parliamentary Secretary Veronica Dorsette-Hector, who also stood to oppose the bill in its current form, said when it was previously presented most of it was agreed upon.
“The challenge for us was establishing the independence of the National Audit Office, particularly in respect to their staff,” she said, referring to the governor’s involvement.
Dorsette-Hector said necessary provisions still need be added to the bill to establish the independence of the organisation.
Funding power
Opposition member Donaldson Romeo, who also rose to speak against the bill, thanked the government for listening to the opposition’s concerns voiced over a year ago.
“I want to commend the honourable premier in particular for withdrawing the bill and allowing themselves time to make the corrections and come back,” he said.
However, speaking to the current bill, he said the Ministry of Finance should not have the power to cut or increase the relevant funding and resources for the office.
“Independence means that not even the UK government or the governor should negatively interfere or impact with the operations of the independent audit office,” he added.
Deputy Premier Samuel Joseph suggested that the bill should be withdrawn to allow for further committee discussions due to the disagreements over its current content.
Fourth or fifth time
Premier Joseph E Farrell, who rose to speak next, said the bill has been in the making since 2012, and suggested that the main question of debate is “what do we mean by independent audit office?”
He said he did not know why it was in the constitution, because there is no fully independent audit office, however, the office in the bill is independent of any political interference.
Farrell said the government cannot afford to allow for an office that is independent “in terms of staffing, finances, IT system, the whole works”.
“I’m really frustrated because this is about the fourth or fifth time that its come to the house,” he said.
“We really thought that we would have satisfied the requirements from the opposition but now it doesn’t seem that way.”
Opposition member David Osborne agreed with the deputy premier that the bill needed to be withdrawn and further discussion had.
“I think that we really need to work together to do what’s best for the people of this country,” he said.
