Wales and Westminster row over audit Bill

12 Feb 04
A major row has broken out between central government and the devolved administration in Cardiff.

13 February 2004

A major row has broken out between central government and the devolved administration in Cardiff.

The rift is over whether the planned new Wales Audit Office should follow the rules governing central or local government regarding disclosure of information about criticised individuals and organisations.

The Public Audit (Wales) Bill establishing the new body, which will combine the work in Wales of the National Audit Office and the Audit Commission, is now passing through the Lords.

It proposes that the new auditor general for Wales, expected to be in office from April 2005, should refrain from publishing information gained during his local government audits except under special circumstances.

This clause – number 54 – has been strongly criticised by the National Assembly, the Welsh Cabinet, the Commons select committee on Welsh Affairs and auditor general Sir John Bourn.

Last week, the Assembly in Cardiff voted unanimously in favour of its deletion.

But the government in London is still adamant – arguing that it is unacceptable for local government to be audited under different rules on each side of the English-Welsh border. A spokesman for the Wales Office said: 'This would create an unacceptable anomaly between Wales and England in respect of the criminal law.'

This line was so bluntly rejected in Cardiff last week that it is clear that the battle will continue. Janet Davies – chair of Cardiff's audit committee, which commissions and then considers Bourn's reports to the Assembly – said: 'Under devolution, things can be done differently in Wales, and we should seize the opportunity to do things better and more equitably. The committee felt it was unacceptable that local government should be treated differently from other public bodies.'

Giving evidence to the select committee, Bourn said that to operate a local government regime in Wales where release of public information would be limited, alongside an Assembly regime possessing no such restrictions, would be 'an anomaly' and 'rather odd'.

PFfeb2004

Did you enjoy this article?

AddToAny

Top