The issue of parliamentary oversight of the Audit Office was raised during the session of the Parliamentary Committee on the Monitoring of Development Plans and the Audit of Public Expenditures, on Thursday, during a meeting between its members and Auditor General Andreas Papakonstantinou to receive a briefing and exchange views on matters within the Committee’s purview.

The occasion was a request by ALMA MP Odysseas Michailidis to submit to Parliament an internal report of the Audit Office, with the Auditor General stating that it was an internal document that could not be disclosed, a position that sparked debate among Committee members regarding the scope of parliamentary oversight of the Service.

At the start of the debate, the Committee Chair and DIKO MP Zacharias Koulias stated that the Audit Office’s reports would be sent directly to the Committee, which will decide which of them will be included for discussion in its proceedings.

Subsequently, Mr. Michaelides requested that the minutes of the Audit Office’s management team—which approve audits and specify their start and completion dates—be submitted to the Committee.

In response, the Auditor General stated that this is an internal document of the Service, which cannot be provided to the House of Representatives.

Mr. Michailidis argued that the House of Representatives, and specifically the Audit Committee, exercises parliamentary oversight over the Audit Office and, in this context, they may request information and documents from the Service.

The Auditor General disagreed with this position, arguing that the Audit Committee does not exercise oversight over the Audit Office.

“The Audit Service is at your disposal at any time. Please contact us so we can inform you about our services and how we operate. However, I have one objection. The Audit Committee does not oversee the Audit Service,” he said.

Mr. Michaelides stood by his position, arguing that the matter is governed by the Law on the Submission of Data and Information to the House of Representatives and to Parliamentary Committees.

“The House of Representatives, and especially the Audit Committee, is the overseer of the Audit Office. This is not a matter of opinion. Within the framework of parliamentary oversight, the Committee may request any data it wishes and have it submitted to it. That is what the Law says,” he noted.

The Auditor General replied that, should there be a persistent demand for access to the Service’s internal documents or working papers, a legal opinion would be sought.

This was followed by statements from the other members of the Committee, with DISY MP Giorgos Pamboridis calling on members to approach the issue in a way that does not undermine the effectiveness of the Audit Office.

“I don’t want us to get into a police-style confrontation with the Audit Office. We must be the Audit Office’s best ally, and together we can help the country,” he said.

A similar approach was adopted by DISY MP Nikos Georgiou, who described the Committee a “natural ally” of the Audit Office and highlighted its long-standing contribution to bringing cases to light that have even led to criminal convictions.

On behalf of AKEL, MP Christos Christofides stated that the Audit Committee has the right to be informed and to form an opinion on how the Audit Office handles cases.

At the same time, Dimitris Baros, a member of Parliament for Direct Democracy, stated that, since the submission of this information is required by law, it must be submitted to Parliament.

Update on the Audit Office’s audit work and report scheduling

In response to a question from AKEL MP Nikos Kettiros regarding ongoing investigations, the Auditor General informed the Committee members that reports are expected to be issued in the near future concerning the Minimum Guaranteed Income, the use of buses, hotel licensing, a project concerning the Maronite community, as well as the election expenses of members of parliament in last May’s parliamentary elections.

On behalf of DIKO, MP Chrysanthos Savvides raised a question regarding the timing of the publication of the recent report on school buses, noting that it was issued after schools had closed, and questioning whether this was done intentionally.

In response, Mr. Papakonstantinou stated that the report was not published earlier because it had not been completed, adding that the aim was to publish it as soon as possible so that it could be reviewed before the start of the new school year.

Source: KYPE