Accountability woes: Petroleum ministry doles out billions in taxpayer money

Refuses to provide expenditure details to the auditor general.

ISLAMABAD:

The petroleum ministry has refused to account for billions of rupees it received for fuel-related expenditures. It refused to hand over the record to the public accounts watchdog, the Auditor General of Pakistan (AGP), who noticed six ‘controversial’ claims worth Rs10.8 billion paid in subsidy to oil marketing companies in 2010-11.

According to a report by the AGP, the amount was paid by the ministry to companies in lieu of price differential claims.

However, the auditors reported that they were not able to ascertain the authenticity of the claims given to certain oil marketing companies, the report revealed. “The audit recommends that responsibility be fixed [against ministry of petroleum] for hindering the functions of the Auditor General of Pakistan, besides provision of the relevant record,” stated a 2011-12 report likely to be tabled to the parliament in July this year.



Dispelling the AGP’s claims, Petroleum Secretary Abid Saeed said that not only did his ministry fully cooperate with the auditors, but it also provided all the records for verification.

“It is our duty to facilitate the auditors rather than to put them in trouble by not carrying out the audit of public accounts,” Saeed told The Express Tribune.

The auditors were seeking records of payment made to various oil firms. According to details, the ministry paid Rs6.63 billion to M/s Pak Arab Pipeline Company Limited, Karachi on Sept 28, 2010. Rs1.97 billion were paid to Pakistan State Oil, Karachi on September 28, 2010.

Similarly, the petroleum ministry paid Rs857.7 million to M/s Pak Arab Pipeline Company Limited, Karachi, while Rs800.3 million were paid to Pakistan State Oil, Karachi in January 21, 2011.



Commenting on the issue, Deputy Auditor General Imran Iqbal, told The Express Tribune that 90% audit paras were again taken up with the ministry officials recently but no satisfactory results were produced.“The issue of non-production of record on account of payment of price differential claims to oil marketing companies is yet to be resolved,” he added.

Section 14(3) of Auditor General’s Ordinance, 2001 states that “any person or authority hindering the auditory functions of the auditor general regarding inspection of accounts shall be subject to disciplinary action under relevant efficiency and disciplinary rules, applicable to such person.”

Published in The Express Tribune, May 29^th, 2013.