Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 551255,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/551255/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 155,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "(2) subject to the generality of sub-section (1), the Board shall, in addition to any other function that may be conferred by this Act or any other law, advise the Auditor-General on – (a) the recruitment of senior managers into the office of the Auditor-General; (b) the development and review of organizational development issues; (c) the budget estimates and plans of the office of the Auditor-General; (d) the remuneration and other terms of appointment of the staff of the office of the Auditor- General in consultation with the Salaries and Remuneration Commission; and (e) any other matter that the Auditor-General may refer to the Board from time to time. I think the Members have the signed and approved copy. What we are saying is that in the current Bill, it simply says that the principal function of the Audit Advisory Board shall be to advise the Auditor-General on the exercise of his or her powers. This will affect the independence of the Auditor. The Constitution is very clear that the auditor shall be independent functionally, financially and in every way possible. That independence is provided for very clearly in Section 10. It states:- “Without prejudice to Section 10 which is very clear on the role of the Auditor in terms of his independence without prejudice to section 10 the principle function of the Advisory Board--- “ Basically what we are saying is that in exercising their work, the Board shall not interfere with the functional independence of the Auditor. That is the amendment that I am bringing and it is very clear in the Constitution that the Auditor-General must remain at all times independent. Although we are saying that the functions of the Board is recruitment, budget estimates and so forth, the way the wording is up there on Clause 26, it says that it shall advise the Auditor on the exercise of his or her powers and the performance of his or her functions under the Constitution. So, you might be giving the Board an opportunity to interfere with the audit. So, I am suggesting that we put there, “without prejudice to Section 10”, so that they do not overstep their mandate. I can mention what Section 10 says for Members who may not have the Act. It says:- “The Auditor-General shall not be subject to the direction or control by any person or authority in carrying out his or her functions under the Constitution” Subject to that Section then that person can carry out that function. The rest of the items remain as they are."
}