The Home Office’s apparent inability to produce reliable accounts for 2004–05 attracted considerable press criticism when the Auditor General issued a ‘disclaimer of opinion’ in the early part of 2006. The headlines ranged from ‘Home Office accused of “casual disregard” for taxpayers’ cash’ (the Press Association) to ‘Home Office hauled over the coals for £180m hole in accounts’ (The Guardian). The headline reproduced at the beginning of this chapter (from Financial Management, the journal of the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants) is relatively modest.
1 What do you think is meant by the phrase ‘… it couldn’t confirm their fairness’?
2 Would you expect auditors to report that accounts are ‘true and accurate’?
3 Is it a reasonable excuse to argue that the Home Office could not ‘reconcile its cash position’ because it introduced a new computer system?
4 Do you think that it was fair of the chairman of the government’s committee of public accounts to blame ‘Home Office finance chiefs for ‘poor management accounting practice’?
5 Do you accept that ‘the proof of the pudding’ in next year’s accounts will really depend upon whether or not more ‘experienced’ accountants have been recruited?