THURSDAY, APRIL 13, 1978
9
HE SAID: +1 WOULD STRESS THAT IT IS FINANCE COMMITTEE WHICH SANCTIONS PROVISION, CONTRARY TO WHAT FATHER MCGOVERN SEEM TO SUGGEST WHEN HE RATHER FLATTERINGLY REFERRED TO MY PERSONAL GENEROSITY IN 'LAVISHLY LASHING OUT LIBERAL LUMPS OF MONEY TO DESTITUTE DEPARTMENTS?,+
ON THE GOVERNMENT'S SYSTEM OF FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION, MR.HADDON-CAVE SAID NOTWITHSTANDING CERTAIN IMPORTANT CHANGÉS
INTRODUCED IN RECENT YEARS, IT REMAINS THE SAME AS IT WAS 20 YEARS AGO, PARTICULARLY INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO THE AUTHOR ISATION OF EXPENDITURE AND THE SANCTIONING OF ADDITIONAL PROVISION.+
HE POINTED OUT THAT IT WOULD BE SHORT-SIGHTED NOT TO RECOGNISE THAT THIS SYSTEM, THOUGH +HAS STOOD US IN GOOD STEAD OVER THE YEARS+, WAS DEVISED FOR AN EARLIER AGE AND MIGHT NOT BE ENTIRELY SUITABLE FOR PRESENT DAY CIRCUMSTANCES.
MR. HADDON-CAVE SAID AS A LOGICAL STEP IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF FINANCIAL DEVOLUTION WITHIN HONG KONG +WE NEED TO DEFINE HOW AUTHORITY SHOULD BE CONFERRED AND AT WHAT LEVELS AUTHORITY CAN BEST BE EXERCISED.+
+THE GENERAL WARRANT SIGNED AFTER THE ENACTMENT OF THE APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE IS NO MORE THAN AUTHOIRSATION TO THE DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTING SERVICES TO PAY OUT UP TO THE LIMIT REPRESENTED BY THE TOTAL PROVISION IN EACH HEAD OF EXPENDITURE.
+THE CONTROL OF EXPENDITURE IS SUBJECT ONLY TO ADMINISTRATIVE RULES.+
MR. HADDON-CAVE SAID ACCORDINGLY, HE HAD ASKED THE DEPUTY FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO HEAD A SMALL WORKING PARTY CONSISTING OF THE DIRECTOR OF AUDIT AND THE DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTING SERVICES TO CONSIDER WHETHER WE SHOULD THINK IN TERMS OF A SYSTEM IF. STATUTORY BACK ING FOR OUR SYSTEM OF FINANCIAL CONTROL AND POSSIBLY INTRODUCE A FORMAL CONCEPT OF ACCOUNTING OFFICER.+
/10
Page 10Page 11