MR. PALMER
3475/23
f
1. The pre-war operation of this fund was possibly permitted because the amounts passed through it were relatively small (in 1939 e.g. credits to the fund totalled only $31,100.60 and debits $47,123.82), but now that they have increased so substantially, as is evident from paragraph 78 of the Director of Audit's Report, it seems advisable to consider the question afresh.
2.
As to secrecy, I cannot myself see that it would be any more difficult to ensure this under a system of accounting through revenue and expenditure than it is under the present system of a Revenue Reward Fund.
3.
Regarding the control of expenditure, the safeguards referred to in paragraph 6 of (1) do indeed appear to provide adequate control by the Executive, but they do not, I think, of themselves provide a similar measure of control by the Legislature.
4.
In view of the recent trend towards relaxing the Secretary of State's control over colony finances, it seems all the more important now to secure the fullest control by the Legislative Council. If, therefore, it is decided to permit the fund to continue, instead of accounting for the receipts and payments through revenue and expenditure, I think it should be stipulated that the authority of the Legislature Council should be obtained to this course, and that Annual Audited Statements of transactions on the Fund should be laid before the Council.
5.
May I please have a copy of the reply
that is sent?
Deputy
Director General
Of Colonial Audit.
6.12.1948.
I think
Commacking Ze h
irene
Chang
para the amounts
we
should reply
t
No 1
I and
3 above;
involved
be
ww
revene and
required
it is conslaved that
the transachors should
dealt with though
expilte and this would not exhear
lesson the secrecy regarding
10
payments.
the
that
sweecssful working
must stipulate as at x above
If however the your comedered this would serously prefidia the ther
for the of the systeem
we
9/12
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.