The PAC met with Akhtar Hussain Langove in the chair to take up audit paras of the C&W department for the fiscal year 2017-18.
Langove expressed his displeasure over the department not calling a DAC meeting. “The department seems to be focusing on a single para and sidelining the rest,” he added.
The chairman added that the C&W department was issued a circular in July to hold a DAC meeting but it had not done so despite the passage of three months.
He told the C&W officials that the PAC had to submit its report in December, but because of the incompetence of the departments, it was finding great difficulty in settling paras.
PPP’s apathy towards Public Accounts Committee persists
The chairman instructed the C&W that it must conduct a DAC within a week and compile a report with the help of the PAC deputy secretary and chief account officer and submit it in 10 days.
Sanaullah Baloch, a member of the committee, expressed his displeasure over the absence of the secretary and the minister of the department. “The next meeting with the C&W would be put off if they don’t attend it,” he warned.
Langove said he was surprised that the department had not complied with a PAC directive issued two years ago.
In 2017, the PAC had directed the department to submit the record of a para within a week.
“The forum of the PAC should not be considered a joke,” he added. He said the committee would not change the directives issued by the PAC in the past.
“If the department fails to provide the relevant record to the PAC within five days, we will refer the case to NAB,” Langove warned.
The PAC members noted that the transfer and postings of several officers in a year not only cost the province a considerable amount of money, but also showed a lack of planning.
The C&W department officials told the committee that in 2014 about Rs700 were transferred for the purchase of land for police stations.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 24th, 2019.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ