PAC cautions MMTU not to deceive public

0
375
MMTU is under the watch of Dr.Philip John Kanu

-Six ghost motorbikes

-No actual ownership for AKA 189 vehicle

By Ishmael Dumbuya

The Parliamentary Public Account Committee has in their interview session with the Milton Margai Technical University (MMTU) cautioned the university’s Human Resources Officer not deceive the public over scary corruption issues captured in the  2022 Auditor-General’s report.

Following the termination of service of staff under the Milton Margai College of Education and Technology (MMCET) on 31st December 2021, according to the report, the university offered contracts to staff for one year (4th January to 31st December, 2022), for which contract agreements were not produced for audit inspection.

According to the report, auditors requested the contract agreements between the university and employees, but the university didn’t provide any for audit inspection, and it was recommended that the University’s Human Resources Manager provides a contract agreement that creates legally binding obligations between the parties; together with the approval of the Board.

In parliament, argument ensued when the HR Manager told committee members that she did provide the said documents to auditors for inspection, a claim which the Deputy Auditor-General, Morie Lansana, refuted and stated that they contacted the university several times before the publication of the report, but receive nothing like that from them. 

According to the deputy auditor-general, it was very much disturbing for the HR manager to tell Members of Parliament that she submitted the contract agreement, stating that the claim has the tendency to deceive the public.

When interrogated by Hon. Segepoh Thomas, Chairman of the Committee, as to whether the  university had proof that the contract agreement  were submitted to auditors, she responded that there were no proofs because it wasn’t requested for.

The chairman who was not satisfied with the reply of the HR interjected and cautioned that the HR Manager should not deceive the public on the issue or risk being fined.

On the issues of the vehicles, the deputy auditor general highlighted that there was no evidence to confirm that the University insured and licensed its motorbikes in order to reduce the loss of property, in the event of damage and other disasters as stated in the university’s financial manual.

He further revealed that the university failed to make available six motorbikes for physical inspection, adding that documents such as vehicle life-card and insurance policy to confirm that the University has ownership and control of vehicle registration number AKA 189 were not made available for inspection.

He underscored that a comprehensive non-current assets register that provides information regarding the description, date of purchase, location, cost, depreciation rates and charges, netbook values 206 and status of non-current assets owned and controlled by the University was not made available for inspection, adding that the team could not place reliance on the cost of assets and respective depreciation figures in the Financial Statements for 2022.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here