4.2.3.1 Though the unidentified deposits have been cleared, going forward the Ministry should ensure that any unidentified deposits are cleared timeously.
4.2.4 Interest on Investments (2013)
Section 13 (2) of the Standards Development Fund Act [Chapter 14:19] states that any excess funds not immediately required for the purposes of the Fund may be invested after approval by the Minister responsible for Finance. Contrary to this provision, there was no evidence that the Ministry had taken steps to invest surplus funds of $6 647 649 that were in the bank account during the year. Consequently, the Fund had a nil balance on the ‘interest on investments’ item compared to the $588 657 that was received in the previous year.
The Ministry acknowledged the observation. The Permanent Secretary indicated that the authority to invest surplus funds is granted by Treasury and of late, Treasury has not been granting such authority due to pressing Government commitments which resulted in Treasury recalling some funds to meet expenditures hence the nil balance for interest on investment in 2013.
In the Committee’s view, funds are normally set for a specific purpose. One wonders whether the recalling of revenue generated under a Fund by Treasury would really justify the existence of such a Fund. Surplus funds of such magnitude might be an indication that the levy could be unjustifiably higher and at the end increase the costs of doing business.
4.2.4.1 The Committee recommends that Treasury going forward should allow part of the excess funds to be invested to allow the fund to earn more income in the form of interests from invested funds.
4.2.42 In view of challenges facing local authorities in terms of paying the levies under the Fund, Government should consider reviewing the levy levels to ensure affordability beginning the 2017 financial year.
4.3 TRADE MEASURES FUND 2010 TO 2014
4.3.1 Absence of Financial Records
For four consecutive years, the Fund did not maintain books of accounts such as cashbooks, ledgers and registers in which financial transactions are recorded. This was in violation of Section 35 (6) (a) of the PFMA. This is despite the fact that the Fund collected substantial amounts, for instance, in 2013 the total revenue was $132 213 against a total expenditure of $160 448; in 2014 the collections substantially increased to $230 125 while expenditure stood at $243 441 and in 2014 again collections increased to $267 226 and expenditure was $369 241. Financial statements were prepared from bank statements, sub-collectors’ schedules and payment vouchers. The audit could not confirm whether all financial transactions were accounted for as payment vouchers were not numbered and monthly bank reconciliations were not performed.
Continued next page
(282 VIEWS)
