1 / 8

Standing Committee on Appropriations City of Johannesburg Audit outcome 2010-11

Standing Committee on Appropriations City of Johannesburg Audit outcome 2010-11. Reputation promise/mission.

nessa
Download Presentation

Standing Committee on Appropriations City of Johannesburg Audit outcome 2010-11

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Standing Committee on Appropriations City of Johannesburg Audit outcome 2010-11

  2. Reputation promise/mission The Auditor-General of South Africa has a constitutional mandate and, as the Supreme Audit Institution (SAI) of South Africa, it exists to strengthen our country’s democracy by enabling oversight, accountability and governance in the public sector through auditing, thereby building public confidence.

  3. Index • Audit Outcome (2010/11) • Key Focus Areas • Leadership Commitments • AGSA Proposed Commitments • COJ Interim Audit Results • Progress on Commitments • 2011/12 Audit Outcome

  4. City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality audit outcomes

  5. Status of key focus areas for oversight and governance structures Revenue Minimal Improvement Property category difference between the Land Information System (LIS) and the billing system(SAP) Actual meter readings were disregarded for billing purposes, customers billed on estimate Supply chain management Minimal Improvement Findings relating to reasons for deviations that do not meet the requirements of Supply Chain Regulation 36 resulting in irregular expenditure Awarding of contracts to persons in the service of the municipality and other state institutions. This includes in some instances declarations not made or false declarations made Predetermined objectives No improvement • Usefulness of reported performance information • changes to planned targets were not approved; • planned and reported indicators were not well defined, specific and measurable Reported performance information not reliable HR Regressed Proper record keeping by the municipality was not maintained on leave liability and financial disciplines were not adhered to. Compliance Minimal improvement Unauthorised expenditure (overspending on guarding services by JMPD) Fruitless and wasteful expenditure (interest on over-due accounts, penalties from SARS, expenditure for resources not utilised) Material errors in AFS submitted for audit No improvement Material amendments to AFS submitted for audit

  6. Leadership Commitments The following commitments were made by leadership to address the audit outcomes for the period ending 30 June 2011 • Address all audit issues raised relating to revenue management • Resolve customer queries urgently • Resolve system integration issues which resulted in differences between revenue source data and billing data • Leave provision records will be properly captured and maintained • Improved documentation of reasons for supply chain deviations

  7. AGSA Proposed Commitments In addition the AGSA made the following proposals to further address the unfavourable audit outcomes of 2010/11: • Prepare monthly AFS with supporting documentation • Preparation of monthly reconciliations (Revenue, debtors etc) • Audit Committee Chairpersons to attend quarterly key control meetings with the Executive Mayor

  8. Conclusion An unqualified opinion is achievable only if all significant issues as highlighted above are resolved.

More Related