The Tribune

By AVA TURNQUEST

Tribune Chief Reporter

aturnquest@tribunemedia.net

PUBLIC Hospitals Authority (PHA) officials have blasted external auditors for failing to investigate whether recommendations raised in the six-year-old internal audit report used to substantiate their findings had already been implemented.

Susan Pratt, Director of the Materials Management Directorate (MMD), said she was saddened by the “egregious” accusations levelled against the department in the forensic audit prepared by UHY Bain & Associates on the PHA’s supply of pharmaceutical drugs and medical supplies.

In her detailed response to issues raised in the UHY report, Ms Pratt charged that the external auditor, John Bain, met with her department for approximately 30 minutes. She added that there was no follow-up with her to ask for an explanation for any of the concerns raised, or to request additional files.

“At no time were there any questions about the MMD practices in 2006 to 2008 in the ten-minute interview with the Director. The only concern raised by Mr Bain was that the tender process could be changed or tampered with. That is, Mr Daniel Knowles, Financial Controller, who has sole custody of the Tender box key, could overnight open the box, to dishonestly change the bids.”

The UHY report covers the period July 1, 2006 to June 30, 2013, with some references to earlier periods. It was completed at the end of March this year, but its contents were not made public until the document was leaked to the media nearly two weeks ago.

On Wednesday, Mr Bain told The Tribune he stood by the findings in his company’s report.

“It is disappointing to see that a six-year-old audit report, which has been acted upon by the department and for which the concerns raised have been addressed has not formed the basis of these accusations,” the MMD response letter continued. “It is evident that little effort was expended in trying to ascertain whether the concerns that were raised six years ago were ever adequately addressed by the department and whether or not they still exist.”

It continued: “Had the MMD team been afford the opportunity, we would have been in a position to clarify many of the conclusions reached by the external auditor, which would have resulted in a more accurate conclusion of the work we do.”

On the matter of conflict of interest over accepting Christmas gifts, Ms Pratt said that the department supported the call to cease the practice. However, she noted that the corporate community has over the years provided assistance on numerous occasions when the government was unable to supply the required funds for programmes, various types of equipment and other essential services within the authority.

Ms Pratt explained that two internal audits, conducted for the years 2006/2007 and 2007/2008, had identified various findings in MMD that needed to be corrected. The findings were reviewed at that time and resulted in the implementation of policies and procedures in accordance to the directives outlined by auditors.

“In fact,” the letter read, “the department received no feedback on our response except for the fact that for the 2008-2013 budget periods the MMD has not received any unfavourable evaluations from the Internal Audit Department.

“To the contrary, the reports have praised the department for implementing the Internal Audit’s recommendations and the fact hat the department is consistently improving.”