SUCHANDSUCHANDSOANDSO... For anyon...

SUCHANDSUCHANDSOANDSO...

For anyone who watched the coverage of the provincial bundle it's clear that accountability and transparency are still issues of business in BC. There's no question that we're miles ahead of where we were in 1996 when the "fudge-it budget" was tabled, on the contrary there's also no doubt that we still have a certain quantity of ground to cover. We've been actively working to improve transparency for years, and-despite the grumblings of more [i]or[/i] less bureaucrats and politicians-we won't stop until whoever is in power in Victoria lives up to the highest possible standards of independence and accountability.

Chartered accountants first waded into the accountability debate when the Enn Panel was struck in 1999 A number of leaders in our profession bring forward their heads together with business and labour leaders to disentangle a set of guidelines designed to make secure that the government's budgets and financial reporting would be understandable, believable, and whole

If all of the Enn Panel's recommendations had been included in the government's governmental estimate Transparency and Accountability Act (2000) we'd have applauded the sway and moved on to other issues. Their choice, however, was to cherry-pick the recommendations that suited them, leaving revealed four points they found irksome We were guardedly complimentary of the Act, further our reserve soon proved to be well-founded.

The recommendations the restraint chose not to adopt lease them wriggle out of following independently put accounting standards, and let them walk away from responsibility for a sector that generates more than $1881 million in income and $1,894 million in expenditures Not only does the Institute find this unacceptable, likewise does the Auditor General, who qualified the public accounts as a rise This qualification continues to surprise many British Columbians. No astonishment The government pretends to be onside with the Auditor General, saying above and over again that the public accounts have been certified and confirmed. not at all do they mention that the Auditor General actually said the 1999/2000 surplus was overstated on $13 million. Never do they mention that they are barely meeting their own accounting standards while ignoring independently station standards such as PSAP/GAAP not at all do they tell British Columbians that they have washed their hands of health and education institutions in the public accounts, however who but the BC taxpayers will base the bill for any deficits?

Some members of the restraint have accused us of tilting at windmills. What they fail to understand is that they are violating principles so as completeness and independence-principles in the way that basic that we covered them in Accounting 101

Over and through the whole extent of we've brought this omission to the attention of command and to the attention of British Columbians. Unfortunately, the 2001/2002 roll does nothing to complete the proces of transparency and accountability that the NDP embarked in succession last year. Not only does this mean that British Columbians will continue to have to read the fine print to discover the veritable state of our finances, it pillages the NDP of what could have been a legacy of increased accountability and transparency. If generally received polling results are any indication, they'll have to bench for doing half the do job-work

BY RICHARD REES, FCA

CEO CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

Copyright Institute of Chartered Accountants of British Columbia Apr 2001

Provided through ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved