Mismanagenent of public finances has a negative effect on the country’s economy and the welfare of people, according to the Office of the Auditor General (OAG).

There have been cases of embezzlement of public funds, delayed execution or mismanagement of projects in areas including infrastructure, education, health, and agriculture, among others.

The Auditor General (AG) makes recommendations with a view to improve public finance management.

While the effective implementation of these recommendations contributes to improved efficiency and value for money in the use of public funds, the trend on this aspect has been somewhat stagnant.

According to the AG’s report for the fiscal year 2020-2021, 48 per cent of his recommendations were fully implemented in 2021, compared to 47 per cent in 2020, and 48 per cent in 2019.

In the financial year 2020-2021, of 4,996 recommendations that the AG had given to audited public entities, 2,384 were fully implemented, representing about 48 per cent of the total.

Of the recommendations that were given to Boards and GBE (Government Business Enterprises), they fully put into action 398 recommendations or 45 per cent of 882 recommendations.

For public hospitals, they fully put into practice 757 recommendations out of 1,878, implying 40 per cent implementation rate.

In an interview with The New Times’ Emmanuel Ntirenganya, Auditor General Alexis Kamuhire shed more light on this and what it means for the effective management and use of public funds.

What does delayed implementation by entities in question imply for the country’s welfare?

The report we submitted to [Parliament] for the financial year which ended June 30, 2021 indicated that overall, the Auditor General’s recommendations were implemented at 48 per cent – that is less than 50 per cent implementation rate, which is a problem.

But, that is the average performance rate for all the audited public entities. There are some entities that performed relatively better as they reached 90, 80, 70 per cent rate in implementing such recommendations.

There are others that implemented them at a low rate, and those are the ones that lower the general performance level.

Our wish is that those recommendations be implemented 100 per cent because it is mandatory. It is provided for by the organic law [of 2013] on State Finances and Property in its article 69 which requires the Chief Budget Manager of every public entity to implement the recommendations of the Auditor General of State Finances [aimed at improving the effective management and use of public funds].

So, they [public entities] should comply with this legal provision.

It might be possible that, in some cases, they have challenges implementing some of the recommendations. They should engage with us so that we discuss and consider how to help them.

But, when they do not come, yet they have the responsibility to implement them but did not fulfil it, we take that as though they are not complying with the public finance management legislation.

All the recommendations we have are related to the lives of Rwandans in one way or another. When their implementation is delayed, it implies Rwandans are losing something in general.

Last month, the OAG said it had its focus on a people-centred audit approach. What does that imply?

When the budget is approved, it is for Rwandans. Our wish is that the funds in that budget be put to good use for the benefits of all Rwandans.

We wish that value for money be ensured to impact the lives of the residents.

When we talk about the budget allocated to the education sector, we want that children get quality education. For the funds allocated to the social protection programmes such as VUP (Vision Umurenge Programme), Girinka, and fighting malnutrition, we want it to reach the residents in need and improve their living conditions.

So, it is not only to consider the money in [financial plan] papers alone, but also in action on the ground. We have to go and see whether the money that was disbursed as indicated in documents, really reached the ground.

What impact should Rwandans expect from the new audit approach providing for inspection reports specific for each sector?

Sectors comprise many entities. For instance, the education sector has Rwanda Basic Education Board (REB) and the Ministry of Education, Rwanda TVET Board (RTB), University of Rwanda (UR), National Examination and School Inspection Authority (NESA), among others. We will audit such entities as usual, but combine the findings so that we make a conclusion on the entire sector performance.  

That helps to come up with a conclusion on whether the sector is performing well, or still has issues to work on, such that people who read such a report and Rwandans in general, can better understand its performance.

This is intended to simplify the communication [of the audit findings] and ease follow-up.

Last month, the OAG organised a training for journalists on reporting about AG’s report. How do you see the media’s role as far as the Office’s work is concerned?

The media is a good partner of the OAG. We submit and present the report to Parliament, but we do not get the opportunity to reach all Rwandans.

But, when the media is available, as it is able to reach very many people, it disseminates what the Auditor General presented in Parliament.

The media communicates our activities to many people, and also points to areas where there are issues so that people are able to know what is and what is not working.

We produced 238 audit reports on [different public entities including projects] and submitted them to Parliament. Media’s access to those reports is very important, and I appreciate the work they do about that.

Are there cases where the media’s reports can inform the OAG about certain decisions?

Yes. There are some stories they produce and we build on them to carry out audits. We read [and follow] many media outlets. When we find a story that is somehow related to our work, we follow up on what is contained in it, and we can even make a decision to perform a comprehensive audit.