This is the accessible text file for the International Journal of 
Government Auditing, January 2007 edition. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

INTOSAI International Journal Of Government Auditing: 

January 2007: 
Volume 34, No. 1: 

Board of Editors: 
Josef Moser, President, Rechnungshof, Austria: 
Sheila Fraser, Auditor General, Canada: 
Faiza Kefi, First President, Cour des Comptes, Tunisia: 
David M. Walker, Comptroller General, United States of America: 
Clodosbaldo Russian Uzcategui, Comptroller General, Venezuela: 

President: Helen H. Hsing (U.S.A.): 

Editor: Donald R. Drach (U.S.A.): 

Assistant Editors: 
Linda J. Sellevaag (U.S.A.): Christopher Lyons (U.S.A.): 

Associate Editors: 
Office of the Auditor General (Canada): 
Sudha Krishnan (ASOSAI-India): 
Luseane Sikalu (PASAI-Tonga): 
CAROSAI Secretariat (St. Lucia): 
EUROSAI General Secretariat (Spain): 
Khemais Hosni (Tunisia): 
Yadira Espinoza Moreno (Venezuela): 
INTOSAI General Secretariat (Austria): 
U.S. Government Accountability Office (U.S.A.): 

Administration: 
Sebrina Chase (U.S.A.): 
Paul Miller (U.S.A.): 

Members of the Governing Board of INTOSAI: 
Arpád Kovács, President, Allami Számvevöszék, Hungary, Chairman: 
Arturo González de Aragón, Auditor General, Auditoría Superior de la 
Federación, Mexico, First Vice-Chairman: 
Osama Jaffer Faquih, President, General Auditing Bureau, Saudi Arabia, 
Second Vice-Chairman: 
Josef Moser, President, Rechnungshof, Austria, Secretary General: 
Henri Bruno Bessin, Inspector General, Inspecteur Général d’Etat, 
Burkina Faso: 
Paul R.S. Allsworth, Director of Audit, Cook Islands Audit Office: 
Vijayendra Nath Kaul, Comptroller and Auditor General, India: 
Muneharu Otsuka, President, Board of Audit, Japan: 
Yun-Churl Jeon, Chairman, Board of Audit and Inspection, Korea: 
Guillermo Argüello Poessy, President, Consejo Superior de la 
Contraloría General, Nicaragua: 
Juergen Kosmo, Auditor General, Riksrevisjonen, Norway: 
Guilherme D’Oliveira Martins, President, Tribunal de Contas, Portugal: 
Albert Edwards, Director of Audit, National Audit Office, St. Kitts 
and Nevis: 
Faiza Kefi, First President, Cour des Comptes, Tunisia: 
Sir John Bourn, Comptroller and Auditor General, National Audit 
Office, United Kingdom: 
David M. Walker, Comptroller General, Government Accountability 
Office, United States of America: 
Guillermo Ramírez, President, Tribunal de Cuentas de la República, 
Uruguay: 
Clodosbaldo Russián Uzcátegui, Comptroller General, Venezuela: 

The International Journal of Government Auditing is published 
quarterly (January, April, July, October) in Arabic, English, French, 
German, and Spanish on behalf of INTOSAI (International Organization 
of Supreme Audit Institutions). The Journal, which is the official 
organ of INTOSAI, is dedicated to the advancement of government 
auditing procedures and techniques. Opinions and beliefs expressed are 
those of editors or individual contributors and do not necessarily 
reflect the views or policies of the organization. 

The editors invite submissions of articles, special reports, and news 
items, which should be sent to the editorial offices at: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office: Room 7814, 441 G Street, NW: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 
U.S.A. 
(phone: 202-512-4707; 
fax: 202-512-4021; 
e-mail: intosaijournal@gao.gov) 

Given the Journal's use as a teaching tool, articles most likely to be 
accepted are those that deal with pragmatic aspects of public sector 
auditing. These include case studies, ideas on new audit 
methodologies, or details on audit training programs. Articles that 
deal primarily with theory would not be appropriate. 

The Journal is distributed to INTOSAI members and other interested 
parties at no cost. It is also available electronically at 
http://www.intosaijournal.org or http://wwwintosa.org and by 
contacting the Journal at spel@gao.gov. 

Articles in the Journal are indexed in the Accountants' Index 
published by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants 
and included in Management Contents. Selected articles are included in 
abstracts published by Anbar Management Services, Wembley, England, 
and University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A. 

Contents: 

New Journal Web Site: 

Editorial: 

Spotlight on the Strategic Plan: 

News in Brief: 

The Role of SAIs in an Influenza Pandemic: 

The INTOSAI Development Initiative Celebrates Its 20th Anniversary: 

ASOSAI Assembly and Symposium: 

Audit Profile: Micronesia: 

Reports in Print: 

Inside INTOSAI: 

IDI Update: 

INTOSAI Calendar: 

[End of section] 

Editorial: 

Public Scrutiny Puts SI Audit Practices to the Test: 

Sheila Fraser, Auditor General of Canada [photograph] 

In 2002, when the Office of the Auditor General of Canada (OAG) agreed 
to audit the federal government's management of three contracts that 
had been awarded to a communications agency 7 years earlier, no one 
could have envisioned the consequences. The initial audit took only 8 
weeks from the start to the final report, but the findings about the 
program that awarded the contracts dominated the Canadian political 
agenda for 4 years. Unexpected results included a public judicial 
inquiry prompted by the audit findings—the first in the OAG's 128-year 
history—criminal prosecutions, and jail terms for a few key players. 
In the process, the Auditor General of Canada's working papers were 
subpoenaed and its methodology was challenged. The lessons learned 
from this experience of intense public scrutiny and the changes made 
to the OAG's practices as a result may be useful to other SAIs. 

Background: 

In March 2002, the then Minister of Public Works and Government 
Services asked the OAG to audit three contracts totaling 1.6 million 
Canadian dollars (1.1 million euros) that had been awarded to a 
communications agency in the late 1990s for advertising services 
designed to increase the visibility of the government of Canada. That 
audit report, presented to Parliament in May 2002, revealed 
significant shortcomings at all stages of the contract management 
process. Because of the nature of the findings, we referred the 
government's handling of the three contracts to the Royal Canadian 
Mounted Police (RCMP), our national police service.[Footnote 1] We 
also decided that we would undertake a governmentwide audit of the 
sponsorship program and advertising activities of the government of 
Canada. 

Sponsorships were intended to increase the visibility of the federal 
government in the province of Quebec by associating the government 
with popular sports and cultural events and organizations. In exchange 
for government funds, organizations agreed to provide visibility to 
the government by, for example, using the Canada wordmark[Footnote 2] 
and the Canadian flag at their events and on promotional material. 
Communications and advertising agencies acted as intermediaries 
between the government and the events organizations and received 
production fees and commissions. 

Audit Findings on the Sponsorship Program: 

Our audit found that Parliament had not been informed of the program's 
objectives or the results it achieved and was misinformed as to how 
the program was being managed. Those responsible for managing the 
program broke the government's contracting rules in the way they 
selected advertising firms and awarded contracts to them. We found 
significant shortcomings at all stages of the contract process: in 
making the decision to contract the work, developing the contract 
specifications, selecting the contractor, and ensuring that the 
government received the contracted goods or services before paying the 
contractor. 

There was a lack of transparency in decision making. No written 
program guidelines provided clear criteria for eligibility, and no 
written objectives indicated that the program had been part of a 
national unity strategy. Moreover, a lack of documentation prevented 
us from determining why an event was selected for sponsorship, how the 
dollar value of a sponsorship was determined, or what federal 
visibility the sponsorship would achieve. 

Furthermore, there was little oversight of financial activities, and 
fundamental principles of control were violated. Roles and 
responsibilities were not segregated to eliminate opportunities for 
fraud or an override of controls by management. 

There was little evidence of analysis to support the expenditure of 
more than 250 million Canadian dollars (173 million euros) from 1997 
to March 2003. Over 100 million Canadian dollars (69 million euros) of 
that was paid to communications agencies as production fees and 
commissions. 

In some cases, sponsorship funds were transferred to Crown 
corporations[Footnote 3]3 using highly questionable methods that 
appeared to have been designed to provide significant commissions to 
communications agencies while hiding the source of funds and the true 
nature of the transactions. Some payments were based on false invoices 
and contracts. 

Appearing before the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, I informed 
parliamentarians of the appalling lack of regard for rules and 
regulations that we saw in the way contracts were managed. Equally 
disturbing was that it happened in the very department, Public Works 
and Government Services, that is supposed to ensure prudence, probity, 
and fairness in contract management throughout the government. The 
problem was not a lack of rules but the failure to observe existing 
rules. 

Our audit revealed that the government had run the sponsorship program 
in a way that showed little regard for Parliament and its financial 
administration legislation. Controls and oversight mechanisms that 
should have been in place had collapsed. Moreover, politicians and 
senior bureaucrats were reluctant to recognize their responsibilities 
and to be accountable for their actions. 

The Gomery Commission: 

Our governmentwide audit report on the sponsorship, advertising, and 
public opinion research activities of the Canadian government was 
tabled in the House of Commons on February 10, 2004. A few days later, 
the government announced the creation of a Commission of Inquiry into 
sponsorship and advertising activities. It also hired a special 
counsel to recover funds that might have been improperly received 
through the sponsorship program. The government canceled the 
sponsorship program in December 2003, several months before we tabled 
our audit in the Canadian legislature. 

The public inquiry, headed by Justice John A. Gomery, a judge of the 
Superior Court of Quebec, had a double mandate: (1) to investigate and 
report on questions raised in our report and to make recommendations 
to the government of Canada based upon its factual findings and (2) to 
prevent mismanagement of sponsorship programs and advertising 
activities in the future. 

For the first time in the OAG's history, all of our working papers 
were subpoenaed, and a written statement of evidence provided us with 
an opportunity to explain our audit methodology. My staff and I 
appeared before the Commission on two occasions, for a total of 4 
days. Hearings were broadcast live on national television. 

The Gomery inquiry could have discredited our methodology and harmed 
our credibility. Any serious doubts about our facts or findings raised 
in the course of the public inquiry could have tarnished the 
confidence the public and Parliament have in our audit institution. 

But our meticulous adherence to methodology and professional standards 
stood us in very good stead throughout the events. And the Gomery 
inquiry concluded its hearings without any serious challenge to the 
credibility of our report. Justice Gomery commended our work in his 
final report: "It became apparent to me throughout the hearings that, 
with virtually no exceptions, the conclusions of the Auditor General 
of Canada, expressed in Chapters 3 and 4 of her 2003 Report to 
Parliament, have been confirmed." 

Our audit of the sponsorship and advertising activities of the 
Canadian government and the ensuing activities of the Commission of 
Inquiry lasted over 4 years and put enormous pressure on our staff and 
resources. The credibility of our office was put to the test. Our 
practices and methodology were scrutinized as never before, and we had 
to respond to an unprecedented number of media inquiries. 

As a result of its investigation, the RCMP laid fraud charges against 
the senior bureaucrat who managed the program and three advertising 
executives. Thus far, the senior bureaucrat and two advertising 
executives have been found guilty and sentenced to jail terms. 

Lessons Learned: 

Given that an audit had never been the subject of a public inquiry in 
Canada, we documented the events and lessons learned. Having our 
working papers subpoenaed for the public inquiry taught us that we 
could no longer assume that our working audit papers will remain 
confidential. 

We have since developed guidance for dealing with audits that have the 
potential of leading to public inquiries. One step we have taken is to 
involve senior management and communications staff early in the audit 
process. 

We have also taken steps to further strengthen our audit evidence to 
ensure that it can withstand a vigorous challenge. For example, we 
have decided that interview notes should be signed by interviewees 
when the contents are evidentiary in nature. 

As soon as our report was tabled, the public discussion about it 
became extremely political as the government and opposition parties 
engaged in a political tug of war about who was responsible. When we 
saw how the public debate was evolving, we stopped giving media 
interviews. Despite this decision, we continued to be mentioned in 
news stories about the "sponsorship scandal," as it was called by the 
media, for many months. 

The parliamentary Public Accounts Committee later commended our work, 
noting the following: 

Efforts were made by some witnesses to discredit or refute certain 
elements of the Auditor General's report [on the sponsorship program]. 
These efforts were generally self-serving and wholly unconvincing. 
From past experience, the [Public Accounts] Committee is quite 
familiar with the audit methodology employed by the Office of the 
Auditor General and the vetting process the Office [SAI Canada] 
follows to confirm the findings that methodology produces. This 
process is painstaking and thorough. 

The overwhelming weight of the evidence presented to the [Public 
Accounts] Committee has consistently confirmed and strengthened the 
observation and conclusions made by the Auditor General in her report 
[on the sponsorship program]. 

That our report withstood intense public scrutiny reflects well on the 
rigor of our audit work and the professionalism of the men and women 
who work at the Office of the Auditor General of Canada. 

Finally, it was rewarding for me, as head of our supreme audit 
institution, to ascertain firsthand that Canadians and 
parliamentarians continue to hold our office in high regard and have 
great confidence in the quality of our audit work. 

The Auditor General of Canada's report to the House of Commons on the 
sponsorship program is available online at [hyperlink, 
www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domindreports.nsflhtm1/20031103ce.html] (English 
version)
or, [hyperlink, 
www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/rapports.nsflhtm1/20031103cf:html] (French 
version). 

Footnotes: 

[1] In cases of suspected fraud, the Auditor General of Canada can 
refer matters to the RCMP's commercial crime unit. This, however, 
happens infrequently. 

[2] The Canada wordmark is the brand identifier of the government of 
Canada and its departments. 

[3] Crown corporations are distinct legal entities wholly owned by the 
government. They deliver important public programs and operate in many 
sectors of the Canadian economy, including financial services, 
culture, transportation, agriculture and fisheries, energy and 
resources, and government services. 

[End of section] 

Spotlight on the Strategic Plan: 

Focus: INTOSAI Strategic Plan: Building on the Past, Creating the 
Future: 

Since its adoption 2 years ago, the INTOSAI strategic plan has had a 
profound effect on INTOSAI. The organization has realigned itself to 
comport with the plan, and the plan continues to be implemented with 
great efficiency and broad-based support. The plan's impact can also 
be seen in the agenda of the Governing Board's annual meetings, which 
are now structured to reflect the plan's four major goals: 
accountability and professional standards, institutional capacity 
building, knowledge sharing and knowledge services, and model 
international organization. 

This was evident at the 55th annual meeting of the board held in 
Mexico City November 1-2, 2006. Hosted by Arturo Gonzalez de Aragon, 
Auditor General of Mexico and host of the 2007 INTOSAI Congress, the 
meeting featured reports by the chairs of the four goals. A summary of 
decisions regarding implementing the strategic plan is provided below; 
a full report on the meeting will be included in the next INTOSAI 
Circular. 

[Photograph: Officers of the INTOSAI Governing Board and delegates at 
the 55th annual board meeting in Mexico City in November 2006] 

Goal 4: Model International Organization: 

Goal 4 was discussed first on the agenda. Osama Jaffir Faquih, chair 
of the Finance and Administration Committee and President of the Saudi 
Arabian SAI, led the discussion. Mr. Faquih's report includes the 
following committee recommendations on organizational issues 
identified in the strategic plan: 

* Develop a framework that provides policy guidance for INTOSAI's 
enterprise-wide bodies when dealing with global donors and partners. 

* Increase annual membership assessments, which have not been 
increased since 1983. (The board approved this recommendation, which 
will be presented to the full membership for adoption at the 2007 
Congress.) 

* Develop a global communications policy and a Web-based communication 
tool to facilitate communications among committees and working groups. 
(The board approved this recommendation.) 

* Identify potential associate members of INTOSAI who meet the 
following criteria: governmental or nonprofit international 
organizations that operate globally and are involved in 
accountability, transparency. and governance issues. 

The Finance and Administration Committee will meet in Oslo in March 
2007 to finalize its report and related recommendations for the 2007 
Congress. 

Goal 1: Accountability and Professional Standards: 

Goal 1 was next on the agenda. The discussion featured progress 
reports by Henrik Otbo, chair of the Professional Standards Committee 
(PSC) and Auditor General of Denmark, and several subcommittee chairs. 
Mr. Otbo highlighted the five areas that the committee work is 
focusing on: 

* finalizing a common framework for all INTOSAI professional standards; 

* conducting a survey on the status of INTOSAI's standards and 
guidelines; 

* establishing a new group, chaired by France, to develop 
accountability and transparency principles; 

* establishing a new subcommittee on performance audit chaired by 
Brazil; and; 

* carrying out the ongoing work of the committee's subcommittees 
(internal control standards, accounting and reporting, SAI 
independence, financial audit guidelines, compliance audit, and 
performance audit). 

Mr. Otbo emphasized the committee's dual approach to developing 
standards—that is, (1) basing INTOSAI's work wherever possible on 
standards that are widely recognized among SAIs and (2) working to 
harmonize public sector audit internationally by recognizing, using, 
and building on standards issued by other standard-setting
bodies to the maximum extent possible and appropriate. In addition, 
INTOSAI will develop complementary guidance where there is a special 
need and/or a pressing concern and will seek to influence 
international standards to address issues of particular interest to 
SAIs. 

The next meeting of the PSC Steering Committee will be in Bahrain, 
April 23-24, 2007, and the full PSC Committee will meet at the INTOSAI 
Congress in Mexico City. For more information, visit the PSC's Web 
site: http://psc.rigsrevisionen.dk/. 

Goal 2: Institutional Capacity Building: 

Ahmed El Midaoui, chair of the Capacity Building Committee (CBC) and 
President of the Moroccan SAI, reported on the committee's work in 
support of goal 2 of the strategic plan. Dr. El-Midaoui summarized the 
results of the committee's inaugural meeting in London in March 2006 
(see this Journal, July 2006, pp. 4-6, for more details). He reported 
that the following three subcommittees established at the London 
meeting have been developing and implementing their work plans: 

* Subcommittee 1, Promoting Increased Capacity Building Activities, 
chaired by the United Kingdom with Cayman Islands as vice chair; 

* Subcommittee 2, Developing Advisory and Consultant Services, chaired 
by Peru with Kazakhstan as vice chair; and; 

* Subcommittee 3, Promoting Best Practices and Quality Assurance 
through Voluntary Peer Reviews, chaired by Germany with Bangladesh as 
vice chair. 

Dr. El-Midaoui and CBC vice-chair David Walker, Comptroller General of 
the United States, also reported on meetings with major donors 
interested in supporting INTOSAI's capacity-building efforts, notably 
the World Bank. 

The INTOSAI Development Initiative's (IDI) annual report was also 
presented under goal 2 since IDI is a central provider of training and 
capacity building for INTOSAI members. Juergen Kosmo, Auditor General 
of Norway, reported on IDI's activities during 2006, highlighting 
IDI's capacity-building work in training, regional networks, 
cooperation with INTOSAI committees and working groups, information 
programs, and distance learning. For more information on IDI programs, 
see the special article on IDI's 20th anniversary on page 20, IDI's 
quarterly update on page 37, and IDI's Web site: www.idi.no. 

Goal 3: Knowledge Sharing and Knowledge Services: 

The report of goal 3 activities was led by Vijayendra Kaul, board 
liaison for goal 3 and Comptroller and Auditor General of India. The 
report includes information about the alignment of the many goal 3 
entities with the strategic plan; the results of a survey on topics 
for best practices, benchmarking, and case studies; and potential 
partnerships with academic and professional institutions. 
Demonstrating the breadth and depth of INTOSAI's work on the goal, the 
following groups also delivered reports: public debt, information 
technology, environmental auditing, anti-money laundering, program 
evaluation, audit of international institutions, and audit of disaster 
recovery aid. 

Plans for this Journal's new Web site were also unveiled as part of 
the goal 3 presentation, featuring a PowerPoint presentation by Mr. 
Walker, United States, that illustrated how the Journal is being 
transformed to take full advantage of technology and make it more 
useful and accessible to readers. The Journal's new Web site will be 
announced in early 2007. 

For more information, contact the Journal at intosaijournal@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

News in Brief: 

Bermuda: 

Annual Report Issued: 

The Auditor General of Bermuda recently issued his report on the work 
of the Office of the Auditor General and on the accounts of the 
government of Bermuda for the financial year April 1, 2004, to March 
31, 2005. 

The report contains observations from the audits completed, noting 
that the accounting records of many entities were seriously in arrears 
and that their audits could not be completed by the January 2006 
deadline. The report also includes recommendations to address the 
problems and deficiencies observed. 

For additional information, contact the Office of the Auditor General: 

Fax: ++441-295-3849. 
Web site: www.oagbermuda.gov. 

Canada: 

Report Cites Improvements Needed in Government Response to Climate 
Change: 

In a report tabled in the House of Commons in September 2006,
Johanne Gelinas, Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable 
Development for the Office of the Auditor General, cited the federal 
government's poor track record in dealing with climate change. Instead 
of declining, greenhouse gas emissions are continuing to grow, and 
Canada will likely not be able to meet its international commitments 
to reduce those emissions. 

The report notes that the transportation and industry sectors account 
for more than three quarters of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions. 
However, even if key measures proposed for these sectors are 
implemented, they may only slow the rate of emission growth. The audit 
found potentially serious financial implications for the Canadian 
taxpayer in the proposed system for trading domestic emissions. 

The report concludes that the government must apply the basics of good 
management-—governance and accountability—-in its leadership of 
climate change. Those involved need to clearly understand, agree to, 
and fulfill their roles and responsibilities. However, the government 
has yet to create an effective governance structure for managing its 
climate change activities and has not yet issued promised public 
reports. 

Looking to the future, the Commissioner urged the government to come up
with a credible, realistic, and clear plan with short- and long-term 
goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; in particular, the 
government's plan should address the long-neglected need to help 
Canadians cope with the consequences of climate change. 

The Commissioner welcomed the government's agreement to act on the 
recommendations in her report, which created considerable interest 
among the members of Parliament and the Canadian media. 

The mandate of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable
Development and her audit team is to audit how well federal 
departments and agencies implement government policies on 
environmental and sustainable development issues and report to 
Parliament and Canadians. 

The report is available online at: www.oag-
bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/. 

For additional information, contact the Office of the Auditor General, 
Communications: 

Fax: ++(613) 957-0474. 
E-mail: communications@oag-bvg.gc.ca. 
Web site: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca. 

Peoples Republic of China: 

New Audit Law Enacted: 

In February 2006, the Standing Committee of the 10th National
People's Congress (NPC) passed a new audit law that President Hu 
Jintao signed into law in June 2006. 

An earlier audit law was enacted in January 1995. Since that time, 
changes in the Chinese economy and society raised many new issues and 
problems for audit institutions. New tasks and expectations made it 
necessary to amend and improve the audit law. 

While the new law does not change the framework and basic content of the
earlier law, it does make changes in the following four areas: 

First, the law improves the audit and supervision system. 
Specifically, it clarifies the legal basis for making audit 
assessments and decisions; stipulates that audit reports should focus 
on results related to budget implementation; permits standing 
committees of the people's congresses to adopt resolutions based on 
the audit reports; requires that governments report to the standing 
committees of the people's congresses at their corresponding levels 
the results of actions taken to resolve problems identified in audit 
reports; and stipulates that the heads of local audit institutions 
should be appointed or removed only after consulting with audit 
institutions at the next higher level. 

Second, the law strengthens audit duties. To meet needs arising from 
reforms related to state-owned financial institutions, state 
enterprises and institutions, and investment and financing systems, 
the law adjusts the scope of audits to include institutions using 
government funds and construction projects mainly financed by 
government investments. The law clearly stipulates that audit 
institutions shall audit the economic responsibilities of heads of 
government departments and other units subject to auditing and shall 
have the power to review audit reports of public auditing firms. 

Third, the law enhances audit powers. It grants audit institutions the 
power to (1) require auditees to provide electronic data stored and
processed by computers and relevant computer technology documents
and (2) examine auditees' computer accounting systems. Audit 
institutions also have the power to investigate auditee savings 
deposited in financial institutions in the name of an individual and 
to have the department of finance suspend auditee assets obtained 
through transferring or concealing relevant documents or violating 
state regulations. Audit institutions have the power to ask for 
assistance from relevant agencies to complete their tasks. 

Fourth, the law standardizes audit practices. It requires audit 
institutions to improve the efficiency of audit work and give adequate 
consideration to the opinions of auditees. If an audit institution 
believes that a lower-level audit institution has made an audit 
decision that violates relevant state regulations, that decision can 
be modified or repealed. The law provides a means of appealing an 
audit decision concerning relevant public revenues and expenditures if 
an auditee disagrees with it. The law also delineates new legal 
responsibilities for audit institutions that divulge state or business 
secrets. 

The amendment and promulgation of the new audit law is a milestone in 
the development of the audit profession in China. It will promote 
audit institutions' ability to fulfill their duties, further 
strengthen audit influence, provide improved financial and economic 
safeguards, ensure the correct administration of government 
departments, and facilitate progress in the government rule of law. 
The law will further standardize the execution of audit mandates, 
strengthen control over audit quality, ensure objectivity and fairness 
in audit results, and promote practical and realistic practice and 
continuous improvement in audit quality and standards. 

For additional information, contact the China National Audit Office: 

Fax: ++86 (10) 68 33 09 58. 
E-mail: cnao@audit.gov.cn. 
Web site: www.audit.gov.cn. 

Colombia: 

New Comptroller General: 

In September 2006, Julio Cesar Turbay Quintero was named to a 4-year 
term as Comptroller General of the Republic of Colombia. Upon assuming 
office, he stated that the slogan for his administration will be 
"Building Public Morality." 

[Photograph: Julio Cesar Turbay] 
 
Mr. Turbay graduated as a lawyer-economist from the Javeriana
University of Bogota. He studied political science at New York
University and has a master's degree in management from the School of 
Business of the University of Miami. He was a council member for 
several municipalities in the Department of Cundinamarca, where he was 
also deputy to the regional parliament. He was a member of the 
Colombian House of Representatives (the lower chamber of the Colombian 
Congress) and served three terms as senator. 

Mr. Turbay also served as a judge and an official of the central and 
agrarian banks. He is the son of Julio Cesar Turbay Ayala, president 
of Colombia from 1978-1982, who recently passed away. 

For additional information, contact the Contraloria General de la 
Republica: 

Fax: (57-1) 3537648. 
E-mail: OOrjuela@contraloriagen.gov.co.
Web site: www.contraloriagen.gov.co. 

Greece: 

New President of the Court of Audit: 

Georgios-Stavros Kourtis has been appointed the president of the Greek 
Court of Audit. A graduate of the Athens University law school,
Mr. Kourtis practiced law from 1968 to 1972. From 1972 until 1995, he 
served in a variety of positions as a judge, examining judge, and 
presiding judge. In 1995, he was appointed judge counselor in the 
Court of Audit and, in 2001, he was promoted to vice president of the 
court. From 1996 to 2000, Mr. Kourtis was the deputy director of the 
National School of Judges, where he also taught financial, 
contractual, and administrative law. He served as a member of the 
central lawmaking committee from 1982 to 1988. Since 2004, he has been 
president of the three-member auditing committee responsible for 
examining the accounts of the organizing committee for the 2004 Athens 
Olympic Games. 

Mr. Kourtis is a member of the Greek Jurists Union and the Society of 
Administrative Studies and the author of many scientific essays.
For additional information, contact the Court of Audit: 

Fax: ++30 (210) 64 66 604. 
E-mail: elesyn@otenet.gr. 

India: 

Annual Report Issued: 

The Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India recently
issued the Activity Report of the Indian Audit and Accounts Department 
for the Year 2004-05. This was the 21st annual report for the 
department, and its layout was completely revised to better 
communicate with users. 

The report highlights the issuance of 80,471 audit inspection reports 
and 86 audit reports to the Parliament. The office carried out 299 
performance audits of the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of 
expenditures; its work proposed the recovery of significant amounts of 
funds. 

See the office's Web site for a copy of the report. 

For additional information, contact the Office of the Comptroller and 
Auditor General of India: 

Fax: ++91-11-23236684. 
E-mail: cag@cag.gov.in. 
Web site: www.cag.gov.in. 

New Zealand: 

Report on Health Funding Package: 

The Office of the Controller and Auditor-General of New Zealand 
recently published a report entitled Allocation of the 2002-05 Health 
Funding Package. Through the Health Funding Package, which was 
introduced in 2002, the New Zealand government injected a considerable 
amount of new funding into the health sector. The package introduced a 
3-year horizon for health funding to replace the previous annual 
funding cycle. 

The report notes that the Ministry of Health had good documentation to 
support decisions on allocating funds from the package. Unfortunately, 
the auditors could not determine how the package funds were ultimately 
spent because district health boards and many ministry directorates 
did not keep separate records of package funds. 

For additional information, contact the Office of the Controller and 
Auditor-General: 

Fax: ++(04) 917 1549.
E-mail: reports@oag.govt.nz. 
Web site: www.oag.govt.nz. 

Puerto Rico: 

Anticorruption Program: 

The Office of the Comptroller of Puerto Rico developed an 
anticorruption program that recognizes the efforts of entities to 
comply with standards of good governance and develop anticorruption 
policies. The program was developed to encourage public servants to 
comply with laws and regulations and address deficiencies identified 
in audits of the use of public funds and property. The office 
established standards and, in 2005, began issuing certificates of 
compliance to those entities that complied with at least 80 percent of 
the standards. 

The standards are the following: 

* enactment and dissemination of the entity's values and culture of 
ethics; 

* publication of rules of conduct; 

* establishment of a hot line; 

* assignment of responsibility to receive and investigate complaints;
* regulation of human resource issues (recruitment, rewards, 
disciplinary actions, and background checks); 

* issuance of rules for continuing education (for new personnel and 
annual reviews for other personnel); 

* establishment of review methods (internal and external audits, rules 
of supervision, and annual internal control reviews); 

* establishment of an effective internal audit activity; 

* establishment of an internal audit committee; and; 

* performance of an annual risk assessment.
 
In 2005, 110 public entities participated in the program, and 85 (77 
percent) received a certificate of compliance. 

For additional information, contact the Office of the Comptroller of 
Puerto Rico: 

Fax: ++1 (787) 751-6768. 
E-mail: ocpr@ocprgov.pr. 
Web site: www.ocprgov.pr. 

Saudi Arabia: 

Symposium on Performance and Environmental Auditing: 

In April 2006, the General Auditing Bureau (GAB) held its third 
symposium on enhancing cooperation in comprehensive and performance 
audit. Osama Jafar Faquih, President of the GAB, opened the symposium, 
which was held in the Institute of Public Administration in Riyadh and 
was attended by top officials of the finance departments in the public 
sector, companies, and corporations. The symposium focused on a 
comprehensive perspective on performance and environmental auditing.
Recommendations adopted by the symposium include the following: 

* Central government units, particularly those in health and 
education, should work with the service sectors to develop and adopt 
performance measures designed to foster good governance and evaluate 
management initiatives and efficiency in exploiting available 
resources and effectiveness in achieving objectives. To accomplish 
this work, government units should adopt a scientific methodology 
based on the following criteria: (1) identifying specific objectives 
that can be assessed quantitatively and qualitatively, (2) avoiding 
duplication of efforts among government units, (3) simplifying service 
delivery to the public, and (4) promoting performance efficiency by 
rotating government staff among departments according to actual work 
needs. 

* To improve institutional performance, programs should be compared by 
reviewing their respective (1) specific objectives, (2) organizational 
charts and allocation of program resources, (3) execution costs, (4) 
achievements and economic and social returns generated as value for 
money, (5) scientific and objective indicators to assess program 
performance, and (6) accounting and information technology systems to 
provide management data needed for decision making. 

* Organizational performance should be assessed by activating internal 
control units to determine the extent to which objectives have been 
achieved, to analyze causes for deviations, and to identify corrective 
actions. 

* Concerned agencies should coordinate their efforts to create and 
issue uniform rules and regulations for environmental protection. 

* A team drawn from specialized bodies should be formed to consider 
requiring companies to disclose possible environmental damage 
resulting from their activities and to identify how this damage will 
be handled and any subsequent compensation will be paid. 

For additional information, contact the General Auditing Bureau: 

Fax: ++966 (1) 403 20 57, 403 30 56. 
E-mail: gab@zajil.net. 
Web site: www.gab.gov.sa. 

[End of section] 

The Role of SAIs in Preparing for and Responding to an Influenza 
Pandemic: 

By Susan Ragland, U.S. Government Accountability Office: 

[Editor's note: This article describes the strategy the U.S. GAO has 
developed to address issues related to an influenza pandemic. GAO is 
interested in feedback on its strategy and would welcome opportunities 
to work with other SAIs on these important issues.] 

An influenza pandemic is a real and significant worldwide threat. 
Pandemics occur when a new influenza virus emerges that infects and 
can be effectively transmitted between humans who have little immunity 
to it. The last three worldwide pandemics occurred in 1918, 1957, and 
1968 and killed approximately 40 million, 2 million, and 1 million 
people, respectively. 

SAIs can play an important role in helping their nations prepare for 
an influenza pandemic by drawing on past experiences and lessons 
learned and looking ahead at what needs to be done. SAIs can: 

* help ensure sound planning and preparedness; 

* help ensure that investments and activities provide value, whether 
or not a pandemic occurs; and; 

* strengthen existing or emerging networks, thereby contributing to 
each nation's overall infrastructure for emergency preparations and 
response. 

Because of the global nature of pandemics, it will be important for 
SAIs to work together to enhance worldwide preparedness and also to 
strengthen countries' capabilities to respond to and recover from a 
pandemic. 

While health experts cannot predict with certainty which strain of 
influenza virus will be involved in the next pandemic, some suggest 
that the avian influenza virus identified in Asia, known as H5N1, is 
the most likely candidate. To date, the virus has spread among 
domestic and wild birds in about 50 countries in Asia, Africa, the 
Middle East, and Europe. Although H5N1 remains largely a disease among 
birds, a pandemic could result if the virus mutates to spread quickly 
from person to person. According to the World Health Organization, as 
of November 29, 2006, 258 persons in 10 countries had been infected 
with the virus since 2003. Of those infected, 154 died. 

The potential scale of an influenza pandemic will depend on whether 
all national capabilities are leveraged and coordinated action is 
taken by all segments of government and society. Therefore, a strategy 
that extends well beyond health and medical boundaries is necessary—
one that includes sustaining critical infrastructure, private sector 
activities, the movement of goods and services across the nation and 
the globe, and economic and security considerations. 

This article describes the strategy that the U.S. Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) has developed to integrate its efforts to 
examine the programs, functions, and tools that the United States will 
need to effectively prepare for, respond to, and recover from an 
influenza pandemic. This strategy could involve a range of approaches, 
including reports and testimonies, briefings, partnerships, forums, 
expert panels, and constructive engagements. GAO will continue to look 
for opportunities to consult with other organizations and draw on 
their expertise as appropriate, leverage ongoing efforts, and limit 
potential overlap or duplication of efforts. 

Key Themes Requiring Attention: 

GAO developed its strategy to help inform the U.S. Congress' decision 
making and oversight of pandemic-related efforts and to help the 
United States prepare for a pandemic in ways that are sustainable over 
the longer term. The strategy builds upon a large body of work, 
contained in over 120 reports and testimonies that GAO has conducted 
over many years on areas such as prior disasters, assessments of 
public health capacities, and efforts to address the year 2000 
computer challenges. Based on lessons learned from prior work and 
consideration of the unique characteristics of an influenza pandemic, 
GAO developed six key themes to guide its work (see figure 1). 

Figure 1: Key Themes of GAO's Proposed Pandemic Work: 

[Refer to PDF for image: illustration] 

Leadership, authority, and coordination: 

Detecting threats and managing risks: 

Planning, training, and exercising: 

Capacity to respond and recover: 

Information sharing and communication: 

Performance and accountability: 

Source: GAO. 

[End of figure] 

Leadership, Authority, and Coordination: 

GAO's past work has highlighted the particular importance of 
leadership, authority, and coordination, a theme that touches on all 
aspects of preparing for, responding to, and recovering from an 
influenza pandemic. In November 2005, the President of the United 
States released a national strategy for influenza pandemics that 
outlines how the United States is preparing for, and will detect and 
respond to, a potential pandemic. In May 2006 a companion plan was 
issued to guide efforts to implement the strategy. Under the U.S. 
national strategy and implementation plan, individual federal agencies 
were assigned important leadership responsibilities in different areas. 

Given the multitude of organizations within the federal, state, and 
local governments, the private sector, and other countries that will 
be involved, it is important for all to have (1) a clear understanding 
of leadership roles and responsibilities and (2) the authorities 
needed to operate effectively and ensure accountability for 
collaborative efforts. Key issues include the extent to which 
leadership roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and have 
appropriate authorities in place. GAO will also be looking for 
innovative leadership approaches that can be used to improve efforts 
to address crosscutting and multisector 21st century challenges, such 
as influenza pandemics and other catastrophic events. 

Detecting Threats and Managing Risks: 

International disease surveillance is a key component in detecting 
threats. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 
collaborate with multiple public health partners, including the World 
Health Organization (WHO), to obtain data on national and 
international influenza activity. Disease surveillance, although 
improved through efforts such as those of the CDC and WHO to improve 
influenza surveillance in Asia, still presents challenges. Many 
countries lack health care infrastructures and public health 
laboratories, and others lack systems for reporting crucial disease 
information to authorities. 

Key issues to be addressed include examining what U.S. agencies and 
international organizations are doing to strengthen domestic and 
international efforts to detect and report animal and human outbreaks. 

Planning, Training, and Exercising: 

By their very nature, catastrophic events can overwhelm responders, 
making sound advance planning critical. Robust training and exercise 
programs to test plans in advance of a real disaster are also 
essential. However, GAO's work over the years has shown that these 
have been lacking in relationship to the challenges of preparing for 
and responding to the annual influenza season. 

Two key issues to be addressed include (1) assessing the extent to 
which the various planning efforts at all levels of government and 
sectors represent a comprehensive, coherent, and integrated national 
framework for a possible influenza pandemic and (2) identifying the 
processes for testing and exercising implementation plans and those 
who are responsible for ensuring that the results are used to address 
any issues or problems identified. 

Capacity to Respond and Recover: 

In addition to the profound human costs from illnesses and deaths, the 
economic and societal repercussions of a moderate to severe pandemic 
would be significant. A World Bank official noted that the disruptions 
associated with SARS led to an economic loss of about 2 percent in 
regional gross domestic product in the second quarter of 2003. The 
U.S. Congressional Budget Office has estimated that a pandemic on the 
scale of the 1918 pandemic could result in a 5-percent reduction of 
gross domestic product in the United States over the subsequent year. 
Rates of employee absences would depend on the severity of the 
pandemic and, according to the CDC, might reach 40 percent during the 
peak weeks of an outbreak. 

Issues to be addressed include assessing what is being done to provide 
the necessary surge capacity in the human and animal health care 
infrastructure to address likely needs during a pandemic (e.g., 
availability of hospital beds; medical supplies, including vaccine; 
and key human capital capacities, including doctors, nurses, and 
veterinarians); examining how ethical issues concerning the sharing 
and distribution of scarce resources are being considered and 
addressed; and evaluating the extent to which the United States and 
its international partners are addressing critical resource 
constraints that impact the capacity of countries to respond to an 
influenza pandemic. 

Information Sharing and Communication: 

GAO's evaluations of public health and natural disaster preparedness, 
response, and recovery show that insufficient collaboration has 
created challenges for sharing public health information and 
developing interoperable communications for first responders. 
Effective coordination between public health and animal health 
surveillance activities is also necessary to detect a new influenza 
strain as early as possible. 

In a variety of public warning contexts, citizens need to be given an 
accurate portrayal of risk that does not overstate the threat or 
provide false assurances of security. The U.S. Department of Health 
and Human Services recently undertook a number of communications 
efforts, including establishing an influenza pandemic Web site 
(www.pandemicflu.gov) and sponsoring national summits with the U.S. 
states. It also released a series of planning checklists for state and 
local governments, businesses, and community organizations. 

Issues to be addressed include the extent to which information related 
to a possible influenza pandemic will be shared among international, 
federal, state, and local agencies and other organizations, as well as 
the ways the information will be used. Another issue to be addressed 
is the effectiveness of communication and information sharing between 
human and animal health systems, including laboratories. 

Performance and Accountability: 

Several challenges are associated with national planning efforts. 
Without outcome-oriented goals and clear performance measures, it will 
be difficult for any nation's Congress or Parliament, the federal 
government, and others to assess the overall effectiveness of 
preparedness efforts. Ensuring that agencies develop complementary 
goals and measures with others, as appropriate, will be important. 
Finally, internal controls and appropriate oversight mechanisms, such 
as controls to ensure the performance and accountability of grants and 
contracts, will be needed to track funds received and spent. 

Going Forward: The Role of SAIs: 

In summary, just as a pandemic would cut across national borders, 
SAIs' audit strategies should cut across jurisdictional boundaries. 
SAIs can collaborate in the following ways. 

* They can work together to develop and apply consistent methodologies 
to assess national preparedness. This would help each individual 
country in its own efforts as well as provide a basis for independent 
comparisons across nations. 

* They can engage in coordinated audits of key issues that cut across 
national boundaries. 

* They can engage in joint audits of international preparedness and 
response efforts. 

For additional information, contact the author at: raglands@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

The INTOSAI Development Initiative Celebrates Its 20th Anniversary: 

By Magnus Borge, IDI Director General: 

The INTOSAI Development Initiative (IDI) was established in April 1986 
by the 12th INTOSAI Congress. On September 20, 2006, IDI celebrated 
its 20th anniversary with a symposium in Oslo. More than 40 
representatives from supreme audit institutions, the Norwegian 
Parliament and government, and international donor agencies 
participated in the event, which highlighted the changing role of IDI 
over the past 20 years. 

How IDI Was Created: 

IDI's establishment at the 12th INCOSAI was the culmination of 
discussions within INTOSAI that had taken place since the late 1970s. 
Members had long argued that an international body was needed to 
promote the training of SAI staff; the centralization of instructor 
training and curriculum development were at the heart of the issue. 
IDI was to focus on training programs and activities, in particular 
training in the "basics" of accounting and auditing, while emphasizing 
the role of INTOSA's regional groups in actual course delivery. In 
fact, at the very earliest stage, a decision was made to provide 
training on a regional basis rather than expecting SAI staff to travel 
to a central IDI location for courses. IDI was also to serve as a 
clearinghouse for collecting and disseminating information, developing 
materials, and training trainers and training managers. Funding for 
IDI operations would be sought from national aid and development 
agencies. 

[Photograph: Participants and instructors from ARABOSAI member SAIs 
took a break from the IT Audit Workshop in Algiers, Algeria, in 
November and December 2006 to visit the National Liberation Monument 
and Museum. The workshop was the final stage of the IT audit capacity-
building program jointly carried out by ARABOSAI and IDI during 2005-
2006] 

IDI's Early Years: 

At its inception, the IDI Secretariat was attached to the Office of 
the Auditor General of Canada. A Board of Directors was set up, headed 
by the Auditor General of Canada and the Comptroller General of the 
United States. 

IDI began operating in 1987 with the delivery of its first training 
programs and the distribution of the first edition of the 
International Directory of Audit Training Information. IDI set up an 
advisory group composed of representatives from INTOSAI regions and 
other SAIs, thus setting the tone of close collaboration to determine 
training needs and to develop and deliver training programs on a 
regional or subregional basis. 

During IDI's first 10 years (1986-1995), the programs developed were 
typically technical training courses tailored to meet the specific 
needs of SAIs in different regions. The courses emphasized (1) 
enhancing the skills of audit practitioners in audit planning and 
supervision, computer auditing, and audit testing and (2) equipping 
the managers of training and personnel departments with new skills 
through management workshops and seminars. 

The Changing Role of IDI: 

After 10 years, an INTOSAI-wide review of IDI programs and activities 
pointed to the need for a stronger emphasis on developing regional 
training infrastructures to ensure the sustainability and long-term 
viability of results achieved at the regional and local levels. IDI 
therefore developed and, in 1996, launched the Long Term Regional 
Training Program (LTRTP), which was to focus primarily on developing 
human and institutional resources at the regional level, with expected 
benefits also accruing to individual SAIs. The key objectives of these 
long-term programs were to help regional groups and member SAIs 
enhance their training capabilities and broaden the scope of their 
training and information exchange activities by establishing training 
infrastructures to ensure the sustainability and viability of regional 
training programs. Key elements of the LTRTP were establishing new 
regional training committees, developing regional operational training 
plans, establishing regional training guidelines, and forming a pool 
of graduate training specialists in each region that could assess and 
meet training needs by organizing relevant local and regional training 
activities. 

The LTRTP was designed to foster regional groups and subgroups that 
could increasingly take responsibility for their own capacity 
building, from determining training needs to designing, developing, 
delivering, evaluating, and funding regional training programs. The 
IDI Secretariat would gradually play a less direct role in regional 
training. Instead, it would provide coordination and support; 
facilitate the exchange of methodologies and technologies; help 
identify human, material, and monetary resources; and provide guidance 
and advice. 

[Photograph: Five IDI-trained instructors from African SAIs discuss 
with the organizing IDI team the program for the regional Audit 
Workshop on Performance Auditing for African Francophone Sub-Saharan 
SAIs, held in Yaounde, Cameroon, during April 2006] 

The IDI Secretariat: from Canada to Norway: 

In 1998, the 16th INTOSAI Congress endorsed a proposal to transfer the 
IDI Secretariat from the SAI of Canada to the SAI of Norway at the 
beginning of 2001. It was felt that after 15 years, a change of 
leadership and venue would be beneficial to IDI and provide added 
incentives for new ideas and endeavors. The transfer progressed 
smoothly, and the new IDI Secretariat in Norway was initiated in 2001. 

By 2003, the LTRTP had been delivered in all INTOSAI regions. Regional 
training committees were in place, regional training plans were being 
implemented, and each region had a pool of approximately 25 training 
specialists available to the region as a whole and to the individual 
SAIs. This freed the IDI Secretariat to concentrate on its new role. 

A survey of SAIs in developing nations was conducted in 1999 and 2000, 
and that information was used to shape the IDI strategic plan for 2001-
2006. The plan envisioned maintaining and further developing the 
regional training infrastructure and expanding programs into new 
areas, such as cooperating more systematically with INTOSAI standing 
committees and working groups and exploring e-learning as a new 
training vehicle for SAIs. 

Following a broad-based, consultative planning process during 2004-
2005, IDI developed a new long-term strategy for 2007-2012. This 
strategy reflects the emphasis in recent years on moving from simple 
classroom training to "training for impact" to ensure that training 
does not become an end in itself but rather a means to the end of 
strengthening the capability of target SAIs. 

IDI's new focus is also reflected in the INTOSAI strategic plan for 
2005-2010, where the IDI is seen as an important partner in achieving 
strategic goal 2, institutional capacity building, rather than merely 
the training arm of INTOSAI. 

The Future of IDI: 

IDI's strategic plan for 2007-2012 seeks to further this strategic 
shift and uphold the excellent reputation that IDI enjoys in the 
INTOSAI community. At the same time, IDI will coordinate its efforts 
with the INTOSAI Capacity Building Committee and other INTOSAI 
entities to ensure synergy and avoid duplication of effort. 

IDI's Partnership with Stakeholders: 

A key factor in the success of the IDI concept has been the active 
input and valuable in-kind support received at every stage from 
INTOSAI members. Without the strong support from SAIs that have 
provided subject matter experts, hosted IDI workshops, or made their 
training specialists available for workshop design and delivery, IDI's 
work would have ground to a halt. 

Financial donors also provide crucial support to IDI. Without the 
approval of the Norwegian Parliament and financial support through the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and NORAD (the International Development 
Cooperation Agency), the Norwegian SAI could never have accepted the 
responsibility of hosting the IDI Secretariat. The direct financial 
contributions provided by multilateral donors and international 
development cooperation agencies from many countries have made it 
possible for IDI to deliver relevant and innovative capacity-building 
programs to SAIs of developing countries. 

For additional information, contact IDI: 

Fax: 47 21 54 08 50. 
E-mail: rdi@idi.no
Web page: www.idi.no. 

[End of section] 

Tenth ASOSAI Assembly and Third Symposium: 

By Helen H. Hsing, U.S. Government Accountability Office: 

The Asian Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (ASOSAI) held its 
10th Assembly and Third Symposium in Shanghai, China, September 10-
16,2006. Hosted by the China National Audit Office (CNAO), the 
assembly drew delegates from 40 member SAIs as well as observers from 
the INTOSAI Secretariat General, INTOSAI Development Initiative (IDI), 
this Journal, and the SAIs of the Cote d'Ivoire, the United Kingdom, 
and the United States of America. 

[Photograph: Heads of delegations to the 10th ASOSAI Assembly and 
Third Symposium in China in September 2006] 

Opening Ceremony: 

Li Jinhua, Auditor General of China, and Han Zheng, the Mayor of 
Shanghai, led the opening ceremony at the Shanghai International 
Convention Center and warmly welcomed the delegates. Chinese Premier 
Wen Jiabao sent the delegates a welcome and congratulatory message. 

Guillermo N. Carague, head of the SAI of the Philippines and chairman 
of the ASOSAI Governing Board, thanked the board for its active 
participation during his tenure (2003-2006). He noted that ASOSAI's 
membership had steadily increased, from 36 at the last assembly to 43 
at this assembly, and welcomed the new members—Afghanistan, Bahrain, 
Cambodia, Georgia, Laos, Mauritius, and Qatar. Mr. Carague noted, "The 
stakeholders increasingly look towards the Supreme Audit Institutions 
to promote good governance, transparency, and accountability. It is 
with this objective of continuously enhancing the quality of public 
audit that we have joined together to form ASOSAI." 

Later in the proceedings, Mr. Carague handed over the chairmanship of 
ASOSAI to Li Jinhua. Mr. Li noted that during Mr. Carague's tenure, 
ASOSAI sponsored many training and capacity-building activities and 
made substantive progress in promoting ASOSAI's development in the 
21st century He expressed his hope that ASOSAI members, working side 
by side, would continue to make progress in attaining the objectives 
specified in the ASOSAI charter. 

ASOSAI Activities: 

Mr. Vijayendra Kaul, ASOSAI Secretary General, updated the delegates 
on the following activities since the last assembly: 

* ASOSAI Strategic Plan. The 34th Governing Board approved the ASOSAI 
strategic plan (2005-2009). Mr. Kaul stated that "the plan recognizes 
that the adoption of the framework of the INTOSAI strategic plan 2005-
2010 would facilitate both greater focus and synergies to optimize 
results." 

* Capacity-building Activities. Since the last assembly, ASOSAI 
organized nine training courses. ASOSAI also entered into a 
partnership with the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and IDI in 2005 to 
target capacity building in the SAIs of Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, 
Cambodia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar, 
and Vietnam. In 2005, the Governing Board organized two additional 
seminars: Managing for Audit Results and Challenges to New Audit 
Frontiers—How to Develop and Manage Human Resources for Dealing with 
Emerging Audit Issues. 

* ASOSAI Research Project: The seventh ASOSAI research project was 
completed. The SAI of India led the project, whose team members 
included the SAIs of Bangladesh, China, India, Malaysia, Pakistan, 
Philippines, and Yemen. 

* ASOSAI Journal: The SAI of India converted the Journal into an e-
journal starting with the 25th edition in October 2005 and redesigned 
the ASOSAI Web site. 

Third Symposium's Theme Presentations: 

The Third Symposium's main theme was The Role of Auditing in Promoting 
Government Accountability. Mr. Cheng Siwei, Vice Chairman of the 10th 
National People's Assembly Standing Committee, delivered the keynote 
speech, emphasizing that from the perspective of the management and 
use of public resources, government accountability should cover 
process as well as finances and performance. Mr. Micha Lindenstrauss, 
State Comptroller and Ombudsman of Israel, delivered a special report. 

The INTOSAI Secretariat and the SAIs of Malaysia, New Zealand, 
Pakistan, and the United States presented papers for discussion. The 
following are highlights of their presentations. 

INTOSAI's Role in Promoting Accountability: 

Dr. Josef Moser, INTOSAI Secretary General, noted that "the global 
process of change that affects government audit presents special 
challenges for INTOSAI." He used the INTOSAI tsunami initiative to 
illustrate how INTOSAI is helping promote government accountability 
worldwide by spurring development of global rules of conduct for the 
use of public funds. 

Malaysia's Best Practices: 

Tan Sri Dato' Setia Ambrin bin Buang, Auditor General of Malaysia, 
described the evolving role of the National Audit Department in 
promoting government accountability. He concluded that (1) better 
government accountability could be achieved by adhering to high moral 
values, (2) all parties need to pay due attention to and comply with 
procedural and legislated requirements, (3) responsibilities must be 
clearly defined and understood, and (4) measurability means greater 
transparency, integrity, and ultimately accountability. 

Importance of Performance Information: 

Kevin Brady, Controller and Auditor-General of New Zealand, described 
his office's broad legislative mandate, experience, and independence 
as well as its importance in promoting accountability. He stressed the 
importance of understanding the performance information process as 
part of the strategic and choice-making context. By thinking about the 
appropriateness of entities' outputs, the targets, and the effect of 
entities' efforts and achievements, performance planning and actual 
performance information form a relevant and necessary feedback loop. 

Facilitating Foresight on Emerging Issues: 

David Walker, Comptroller General of the United States, suggested that 
SAIs should complement their traditional responsibilities by providing 
policymakers with foresight about key emerging issues. As an example, 
he cited GAO's publication of an unprecedented report entitled 21st 
Century Challenges that asks probing, and sometime provocative, 
questions about current government policies, programs, and operational 
practices. 

New Global Paradigm: 

Muhammad Yunis Khan, Auditor General of Pakistan, discussed the three 
aspects of accountability: fiscal, managerial, and program. He stated 
that there are three global drivers of a paradigm shift—globalization, 
technical innovation, and customization. Mr. Khan noted, "Strategic 
alliances between SAIs in research, developing processes, and 
knowledge sharing will create a professional advantage, strengthening 
trust and enhancing credibility for SAIs with their stakeholders. In 
return, the stakeholders will benefit...at the international level." 

A lively and interactive discussion involving 20 countries or agencies 
followed the presentations. The discussion generally focused around 
five themes: (1) the importance of government accountability, (2) 
auditor relations with legislative bodies and the media, (3) auditor 
relations with auditees, (4) the importance of mutual cooperation, and 
(5) auditors' roles and capacities. Delegates had mixed views about 
the suggestion that SAIs develop better relations with legislative 
bodies, the public, and the press if they are to strengthen the 
effectiveness of the accountability system. Some delegates believed 
that the news media should function as the bridge between auditors and 
the public, supporting and complementing audit work. Others thought 
that auditors should limit themselves to giving the media confirmed 
facts about audit results. Some delegates believed that it would be 
beneficial for auditors to have a participative relationship with the 
auditee and that such a relationship is possible without jeopardizing 
the auditor's independence and objectivity. Others believed that in 
promoting such relations with auditees, auditors risk becoming too 
involved in decision making relating to the auditee's policies. 

Participants agreed that the existing cooperation between ASOSAI and 
the INTOSAI Secretariat should continue and be strengthened. SAIs 
should also consider strengthening relations with each other and 
improving accountability and transparency across national borders. Dr. 
Anwar Nasution, Chairman of the Indonesian SAI, suggested that SAIs 
collaborate with each other to assess governmental efforts to prepare 
for the possibility of an avian influenza pandemic. Discussion also 
focused on the auditor's ability to reach a larger audience with its 
reports and the need to focus on the auditor's right to impose 
sanctions. There was also much discussion on the need to enhance both 
auditor training and the ability of audit institutions to promote 
government accountability. 

Election of New Members and Other Business: 

The assembly approved the SAI of China as the incoming chairman. It 
also unanimously appointed Mr. Vijayendra Kaul to another term as 
ASOSAI's Secretary General. The SAIs of Korea, Kuwait, Malaysia, Saudi 
Arabia, and Turkey were elected to the Governing Board. The SAIs of 
Jordan and Outer Mongolia were elected to the Audit Committee. 

The Governing Board also approved the papers presented at the Third 
Symposium, the report of the ASOSAI Working Group on Environmental 
Auditing, and the report of the INTOSAI Professional Standards 
Committee meetings. It also approved the budget for 2006-2008. 

Mr. Khan, Auditor General of Pakistan, invited participants to the 
11th ASOSAI assembly, which will be held in Pakistan in 2009. 

Other Activities: 

Throughout the conference, the Auditor General of China treated 
participants with warmth and hospitality. Mr. Li Jinhua hosted a 
banquet for delegates and invited guests at the Shanghai Convention 
Center; the banquet was followed by a performance of the Shanghai 
Acrobatic Troupe. The auditors general of the Philippines, India, and 
Pakistan also hosted dinners at different venues. 

Delegates and invited guests had the opportunity to ride the magnetic 
levitation train from the Long Yang Subway Station to Pudong 
International Airport and back and also visited the Oriental Pearl 
Tower, where they were able to view Shanghai, have lunch, and learn 
about Shanghai's history at the City Museum. Guests also toured 
Shanghai's Museum of Art and Urban Museum. The Shanghai mayor, Mr. Han 
Zheng, hosted the closing banquet at the Shanghai Exhibition Hall. 
Delegates and invited guests were treated to a boat ride on the 
Huangpu River, where they viewed a beautiful fireworks display. 

Information on the ASOSAI Assembly and Third Symposium is posted on 
the CNAO Web site. For additional information, contact the China 
National Audit Office: 

Fax: ++(86) 10-68330958. 
E-mail: cnao@audit.gov.cn. 
Web site: www.enao.gov.cn. 

[End of section] 

Audit Profile: Office of the National Public Auditor of the Federated 
States of Micronesia: 

By Moses Williams Russel, Office of the Public Auditor: 

The Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) is a grouping of 607 small 
islands in the Western Pacific about 2,500 miles southwest of Hawaii, 
just above the equator. While the country's total land area amounts to 
only 270.8 square miles, it occupies more than 1 million square miles 
of the Pacific Ocean and stretches 1,700 miles from east to west. It 
is divided into four states (Kosrae, Chuuk, Pohnpei, and Yap), and its 
largest island is Pohnpei. 

Background: 

In 1979, the FSM, a United Nations Trust Territory under the 
administration of the United States, adopted a constitution. In 1986, 
the FSM attained independence under a compact of free association with 
the United States, which was amended and renewed in 2004. 

In 1979, the Office of the National Public Auditor was established 
under article XII, section 3, of the constitution of the FSM and title 
55, chapter 5, of the FSM code. The office seeks to enhance 
governance, accountability, and performance in the public sector 
through the delivery of independent assurance and investigative 
services. Its mission is to create an environment in which reports on 
the office's audits and investigations lead to improved government 
operations. 

Legal Authority: 

The national public auditor is appointed by the president of the FSM 
with the advice and consent of Congress and serves for a term of 4 
years. An individual may be reappointed for additional terms with the 
advice and consent of Congress. Congress may remove the public auditor 
from office for cause by a two-thirds vote. In the event of such a 
removal, the chief justice of the FSM Supreme Court appoints an acting 
public auditor until a successor is confirmed. 

The public auditor is authorized by statute to evaluate the adequacy 
and effectiveness of management controls in accomplishing the national 
government's policies, plans, and directives. To that end, members of 
the Office of the National Public Auditor are authorized to have full, 
free, and unrestricted access to all national government functions, 
records, property, and personnel. This authority extends to states and 
nonprofit organizations that receive funds from the national 
government. 

The public auditor may choose to perform, or assist in performing, 
audits that are requested by statute. He or she has exclusive audit 
jurisdiction over public funds of the FSM national government. The 
public auditor may also, if funding is available, contract for 
independent auditing services to be performed under his or her 
supervision when specialized expertise is required or auditing 
requirements are beyond the capacity of the office's staff. The public 
auditor may subpoena persons to appear before him or her and question 
such persons, under oath, regarding the receipt and expenditure of 
money, as well as any other relevant matters. 

Duties: 

It is the public auditor's duty to examine and inspect all books, 
records, files, papers, documents, and financial affairs of each 
branch, department, office, agency board, commission, bureau, and 
statutory authority of the national government and other public legal 
entities, including state and nonprofit organizations receiving funds 
from the national government. 

The public auditor inspects and audits transactions, accounts, books, 
and other financial records associated with any project, program, or 
activity receiving funds in whole or in part from the national 
government's public funds. 

The public auditor may audit the records of any contractor performing 
public work under a cost-reimbursement contract with the FSM to verify 
the fees assessed. Any contractor performing public work under such a 
contract must maintain the records necessary to establish the validity 
of costs charged to the national government. 

The public auditor is also responsible for performing other audits 
specifically required by statute. 

The public auditor must file a report at least annually with the 
Congress and may file other reports throughout the year at his or her 
discretion. All reports of the public auditor are to be made available 
to the public. 

Along with his or her audit reports, the public auditor may submit 
recommendations on matters within his or her jurisdiction, including 
compliance or noncompliance with laws governing the expenditures of 
public moneys and the need for amendments or new laws to secure the 
efficient expenditure of public funds. 

The public auditor must maintain a complete and accurate record of 
audit reports, inspections, investigations, releases, audit work 
papers, and other material pertaining to the office's work. 

Audit Reports: 

As required by government auditing standards, the Office of the 
National Public Auditor prepares a written report for each audit 
performed. The report is issued to the target agency so that it may 
address the report's recommendations. 

The reports generally include the audit's objectives, scope, and 
methodology; a statement that the audit was conducted in accordance 
with government auditing standards; findings; and recommendations for 
corrective action. Management's written response to the draft audit 
findings is also included. All audit reports issued since fiscal year 
2000 are posted on the office's Web site, as are selected earlier 
reports. In rare cases, a report may not be posted for security or 
privacy reasons. 

Organizational Structure: 

The Office of the National Public Auditor currently has 17 staff, 
including the national public auditor. Its administrative division has 
three staff (an administrative officer, a secretary, and a clerk). Its 
Audit Division has one audit manager, two audit supervisors and eight 
auditors, and its Compliance Investigation Division (CID) has three 
employees (a chief investigator and two staff). 

Peer Review: 

The Office of the National Public Auditor is required to have a peer 
review at least every 3 years by a member of the Association of 
Pacific Islands Public Auditors. The Office of the National Public 
Auditor passed its last review in 2005. The review was performed by 
the Office of the Public Auditor, Republic of Palau; the Territorial 
Auditor of American Samoa; and a representative of the USDA Graduate 
School. 

Strategic Plan 2004-2007: 

The office worked diligently to create a strategic plan for 2004-2007. 
This work gave the office a more comprehensive understanding of its 
environment, its stakeholders' needs, and its current capability to 
respond to those needs. Based on this understanding, the office 
developed its strategies and actions for the next 3 years. Dr. Lowell 
Kuehn, a consultant from Pacific Northwest Consulting Services, 
facilitated a weeklong strategic planning process in Pohnpei in 
February 2005. All staff of the Office of the National Public Auditor 
participated in the discussions. Dr. Kuehn also facilitated the 
development of strategic plans for the supreme audit institutions of 
the Mariana Islands and Guam. 

For additional information, contact the Office of the Public Auditor: 

Fax: ++691 320 54 82. 
E-mail: fsmopa@mail.fm. 

[End of section] 

Reports in Print: 

SAIs routinely issue reports identifying best practices in a variety 
of areas, from risk management to procurement to program 
implementation. Below are some relevant best practices reports that 
SAIs have issued. 

In June 2006, New Zealand's Office of the Auditor-General (OAG) issued 
a best practices guide entitled Principles to Underpin Management by 
Public Entities of Funding to Non-Government Organisations (NG0s). The 
OAG published this report to guide public entities' decisions when 
they enter into funding arrangements with NG0s. The report includes a 
discussion of four funding scenarios, such as a health sector 
contractual arrangement, to show how the principles might be applied. 
A copy of the report is available on the OAG Web site: www.oag.govt.nz. 

For additional information, contact the OAG: 

Fax: ++64-4 917 154. 
E-mail: Info@oag.govt.nz. 

The Australia National Audit Office (ANAO) recently published a guide 
to demonstrate and explain best practices that organizations use in 
combating external fraud. The guide, entitled Good Practice in 
Tackling External Fraud, includes checklists to help public sector 
managers assess current antifraud practices and provides case studies 
to demonstrate the implementation of best practices. It covers three 
topics: understanding and managing the risks of external fraud; 
preventing and deterring external fraud; and detecting and 
investigating fraud and imposing sanctions. 

In October 2006, the ANAO also published a best practices guide 
entitled Implementation of Programme and Policy Initiatives: Making 
Implementation Matter. This comprehensive report focuses on the 
planning and development phase of government programs, recognizing 
that optimal outcomes from policy initiatives are more likely to be 
obtained when there is early and systematic consideration of the 
practical aspects of implementation. Each section of the guide 
addresses an important topic for chief executives to consider when 
designing and implementing policy initiatives. For example, the guide 
covers such issues as governance, risk management, communication, 
resources, and monitoring and review. 

Copies of these reports are available on the ANAO Web site: 
www.anao.gov.au. 

For additional information, contact the ANAO: 

Fax: ++61 2 9367 7102. 
E-mail: agl@anao.gov.au. 

In June 2006, the National Audit Office (NAO) of the United Kingdom 
unveiled its Efficiency Toolkit, a Web-based guide providing practical 
guidance on assessing a public sector organization's efficiency. This 
toolkit guides users in assessing organizations in five areas: 
leadership, systems and operations, achievement, external drivers and 
constraints, and customer needs and demands. It contains detailed 
assessment materials as well as templates for recording, analyzing, 
and reporting findings. 

The toolkit can be accessed on the NAO Web site at: 
www.nao.org.uk/efficiency/toolkit/index.htm. 

For additional information, contact the NAO: 

Fax: ++44 (0) 20 7798 7719. 
E-mail: enquiries@nap.gsi.gov.uk. 
Web site: www.nao.org.uk. 

As part of its ongoing review of government agencies' efforts to 
address human capital challenges, the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) published a framework to serve as a flexible and useful 
guide to assessing how agencies plan, design, implement, and evaluate 
effective training and development programs that contribute to 
improved organizational performance and enhanced employee skills and 
competencies. Human Capital: A Guide for Assessing Strategic Training 
and Development Efforts in the Federal Government, published in 2004, 
summarizes attributes of effective training and development programs 
and presents related questions concerning the components of the 
training and development process. This guide is intended to help 
managers assess an agency's training and development efforts and make 
it easier to determine what, where, and how improvements can be 
implemented. The report (GAO-04-546G) is available on the GAO Web site 
(www.gao.gov). 

For additional information, contact GAO: 

Fax: ++(202) 512-4021. 
E-mail: spel@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Inside INTOSAI: 

Financial Audit Guidelines Subcommittee: 

First Practice Note Approved: 

The first practice note—on ISA 230: Audit Documentation—was approved 
by the Financial Audit Guidelines Subcommittee (FAS). This was the 
culmination of many years of hard work by the Project Secretariat and 
experts from the INTOSAI community. The practice note was also the 
first to be submitted for approval to the INTOSAI Governing Board in 
November 2006. 

Subcommittee Meetings: 

On September 25-26, 2006, the International Auditing and Assurance 
Standards Board (IAASB) generously hosted an FAS meeting in New York. 
New subcommittee members from the SAIs of Brazil and South Korea 
participated in a meeting for the first time as did new 
representatives from the SAIs of the United States and the United 
Kingdom. 

Participants discussed the practice notes to ISAs 230 and 240. In 
addition, the new work plan and timeline for the Authority and Scope 
of Financial Audit Guidelines, Terms of Reference for the Compliance 
Audit Reference Expert Group, were approved. Other important issues 
discussed were the issues paper from Practice Note Task Force 1 and 
the translation issue. 

The FAS's work is in an intensive phase, and all subcommittee members 
are very active. The Project Secretariat would like to thank the 
members for the significant amounts of time and knowledge they have 
invested in this project. 

The next FAS meeting will be a telephone conference on January 22, 
2007. The spring 2007 meeting will be hosted by the Canadian SAI in 
Ottowa on June 18-19, 2007. 

Contributions of the Reference Panel: 

For the FAS Project Secretariat, the two reference panel meetings held 
in Stockholm in September 2006 resulted in valuable comments regarding 
the wording and format of the practice notes, the general section of 
the Financial Audit Guidelines, the Authority and Scope of Financial 
Audit Guidelines, and practice notes to ISAs 230 and 240.
The input from that meeting led to relevant changes in the documents, 
which the FAS discussed several weeks later. 

New Call for Experts: 

In November 2006, the FAS Project Secretariat sent out a letter to all 
INTOSAI members encouraging them either to confirm their present 
participation in the reference panel or to further contribute to the 
work by nominating new experts and back-office experts for the 
reference panel. SAIs were asked to respond by mid-January 2007. The 
results will be presented in the April 2007 Journal. 

Timetable and Work Plan: 

At the FAS meeting in September 2006, a new timetable and work plan 
were adopted. The FAS's new goal is to develop 14 practice notes to be 
endorsed by the next INCOSAI in 2007. The overall goal for 2010—to 
have a complete set of guidance—remains. 

The timetable, work plan, and appendixes will soon be available on the 
FAS Web site. 

For additional information, contact the FAS Project Secretariat: 

Fax: ++46-8-5171 4111. 
E-mail: projectsecretariat@riksrevisionen.se. 
Web site: http://psc.rigsrevisionen.dk/fas. 

Working Group on Environmental Auditing: 

Transition to a New Chair: 

The Office of the Auditor General of Canada is turning over the 
chairmanship of the Working Group on Environmental Auditing (WGEA) to 
a new SAI at the 19th INCOSAI in Mexico City in November 2007. The 
National Audit Office of Estonia, led by Auditor General Mihkel Oviir, 
has offered and made a firm commitment to be the WGEA's next chair. 
The WGEA Steering Committee and the INTOSAI Governing Board have 
endorsed the Estonian SAI's nomination. The Office of the Auditor
General of Canada is fully committed to completing its mission as the 
current chair and ensuring an effective and supportive transition. 

WGEA Launches New Web Pages on Auditing Waste and Water Issues: 

At the end of November 2006, the WGEA launched new Web pages on 
auditing waste and water issues. These pages, which reflect SAIs' 
continued interest in these areas, provide information on how to audit 
issues related to waste, waste management, water, and water management 
and may be a useful starting point for SAIs planning related audits. 
They also provide links to presentations and papers on the latest 
auditing experiences, guidance papers, audit reports, international 
agreements, international organizations and Web sites, and examples of 
how policies and systems work in different countries. The pages can be 
found on the publications section of the WGEA Web site at 
www.environmental-
auditing.orglintosai/wgea.nsflviewhtml/waste_Omain.htm and 
www.environmental-
auditing.org/intosai/wgea.nsflviewhtml/water_Omain.htm. 

The WGEA Secretariat would like to thank the SAIs of Norway and the 
Netherlands for providing the content for these pages. 

WGEA Projects: 

The Office of the Auditor General of Canada hosted the fifth WGEA 
steering committee meeting in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, in 
September 2006. At this meeting, all WGEA projects under development 
were discussed and advanced. The following guidance papers on four of 
the projects are expected to be finalized and ready for distribution 
at 19th INCOSAI: 

* moving towards auditing biodiversity (by the SAIs of Brazil and 
Canada), 

* cooperation between SAIs on international audits: tips and examples 
(by the SAIs of the Netherlands and Poland), 

* evolution and trends in environmental auditing (by the SAI of 
Canada), and, 

* reviewing the implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable 
Development commitments (by the SAI of the United Kingdom).
 
Further information on the projects is available on the WGEA Web site 
at www.environmental-auditing.org/intosa/wgea.nsf/viewProjects. 

Upcoming WGEA Assembly Meeting: 

The 11th WGEA meeting will be hosted by the Office of the Controller 
and Auditor General of the United Republic of Tanzania during the week 
of June 25, 2007, in Arusha, Tanzania. The meeting will emphasize 
learning and exchanging experiences through: 

* presentations by renowned speakers from United Nations agencies and 
other international institutions; 

* SAI-led workshops on climate change, biodiversity, waste and water 
management, cooperative audits, and effective methods for 
environmental audits; 

* small group discussions on participants' questions; and; 

* educational sessions on WGEA projects from the current work plan. 

The meeting will also address WGEA business, including formal 
approvals of currently developed guidance documents and discussions of 
the 2008-2010 work plan. All WGEA members are encouraged to attend. 
Formal invitations were sent in December 2006. 

Greenlines: 

Greenlines, the online newsletter of the WGEA, is celebrating its 10th 
anniversary. The current issue (volume 9, number 2, November 2006) has 
been posted on the WGEA website at www.environmental-
auditing.org/intosai/wgea.nsflviewContainerPubleng06pu_greenv9n2nov.htma
file/eng06pu_greenv9n2nov.htm. 

This edition includes a feature story by the Ukrainian Accounting 
Chamber on its collaborative international audit efforts, news briefs 
from SAIs around the world, and news on important WGEA matters from 
the Secretariat. 

The WGEA Secretariat would like to thank the SAI of the United States, 
which has assumed responsibility for producing Greenlines since 2005. 

For additional information contact the WGEA: 

E-mail: environmental auditing@oag-bvg.gc.ca. 
Web site: www.environmental-auditing.org. 

[End of section] 

IDI Update: 

IDI Update keeps you informed of developments in the work and programs 
of the INTOSAI Development Initiative. To find out more about IDI and 
to keep up to date between editions of the Journal, look at the IDI 
website: www.idi.no. 

New IDI Strategic Plan 2007-2012: 

The new IDI strategic plan for the next 6 years will take effect in 
January 2007. In response to the concerns expressed by stakeholders in 
a highly consultative planning process, the plan marks a strategic 
shift—from training to broader capacity development. A complete 
version of the plan is available on the IDI Web site: www.idi.no. 

As a first step in implementing its new strategic plan, IDI plans to 
undertake a global institutional needs assessment in 2007. The IDI 
team will develop a needs assessment framework and the tools and 
instruments required to complete the assessment. The assessment will 
be carried out in at least three INTOSAI regions in 2007. 

IDI/AFROSAI-E Quality Assurance Workshop: 

In August 2006, the courseware for a Workshop on Conducting Quality 
Assurance Reviews for Financial Audit was developed by a group of new 
training specialists in AFROSAI-E (African English-speaking SAIs) and 
a subject matter expert from the SAI of Zimbabwe. The 1-week workshop 
was delivered in Namibia in October 2006 to 30 auditors from the 
region. The goal of the workshop was to disseminate the AFROSAIE 
quality assurance model and identify a regional pool of quality 
assurance reviewers for financial audit. 

IDI/CREFIAF Redesign of Workshop on Performance Audit: 

In 2006, IDI conducted a Regional Workshop on Performance Auditing as 
a second phase of its Long Term Regional Training Programme in CREFIAF 
(African Sub-Saharan Francophone SAIs). Teams of auditors from 
selected SAIs were invited to attend this workshop. The course will be 
delivered a second time to give the remaining SAIs a chance to benefit 
from the program. A new group of training specialists gathered in 
Djibouti in October 2006 to prepare to deliver this second course, 
which will take place in Mali in February 2007. 

IDI/ASOSAI Cooperation for Capacity Building: 

During the needs assessment programs conducted in October and November 
2005, English- and Russian-speaking SAI participants expressed a need 
for capacity building in financial audit and detecting fraud and 
corruption. To address these priorities, a joint design meeting was 
held in Cambodia in November 2006 for English- and Russian-speaking 
instructor teams. Courseware for both areas was developed in English 
for the SAIs of Afghanistan, Cambodia, Laos, Maldives, Myanmar, and 
Vietnam and in Russian for the SAIs of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, 
Kyrgyzstan, and Mongolia. ASOSAI will manage the delivery of the 
workshops in 2007. 

IDI/ARABOSAI Capacity-building Program in IT Auditing: 

As the final activity of this IDI/ARABOSAI program, a 2-week IT Audit 
Workshop was delivered to 30 participants from 11 countries in 
November/December 2006. The original English course material was 
translated into Arabic and revised to include case studies and 
exercises derived from four pilot audits conducted earlier in the 
program. 

IDI and Liaison with the INTOSAI Community: 

IDI representatives have attended and reported at the following events 
in recent months: the CAROSAI Congress and Master Classes (Bahamas), 
the INTOSAI Governing Board Meeting (Mexico), the OLACEFS General 
Assembly (Ecuador), and the Cooperation and Technical Update Workshop 
for AFROSAI-E (South Africa). 

Contacting IDI: 

To discuss any of the issues raised in this edition of the IDI Update, 
contact IDI: 

Telephone: ++47 21 54 08 10. 
E-mail: idi@idi.no. 
Web site: www.idi.no. 

[End of section] 

INTOSAI 2007 Events: 

January 15-17: 
Subcommittee on Internal Control Standards meeting, Muscat, Oman. 

January 22: 
Financial Audit Guidelines Subcommittee telephone conference. 

February 11-14: 
Working Group on Environmental Auditing Steering Committee meeting, 
Cape Town, South Africa. 

March 3-4: 
IT Committee Seminar on Performance Auditing, Muscat, Oman. 

March 6-7: 
IT Committee meeting, Muscat, Oman. 

March 21: 
IDI Board meeting Oslo, Norway. 

March 26: 
Finance and Administration Committee meeting, Oslo, Norway. 

March 28-30: 
19th UN/INTOSAI Symposium, Vienna, Austria. 

April 10-13: 
Committee on Experts on Public Administration meeting, U.N. Economic 
and Social Council, New York, United States. 

April 23-24: 
Professional Standards Committee Steering Committee meeting, Bahrain. 

April 23-25: 
5th meeting of the Task Force on the Audit of International 
Institutions, Budapest, Hungary. 

April TBD: 
Financial Audit Guidelines Subcommittee meeting, Canada. 

May 10-12: 
V EUROSAI/OLACEFS Seminar, Lisbon, Portugal. 

May 26-31: 
ARABOSAI Congress, Yemen. 

June 18-19: 
Financial Audit Guidelines Subcommittee meeting, Ottawa, Canada. 

June 25-29: 
11th Working Group on Environmental Auditing Assembly, Arusha, 
Tanzania. 

June TBD: 
Public Debt Committee meeting, Lisbon, Portugal. 

July 10: 
Financial Audit Guidelines Subcommittee telephone conference. 

August 23-27: 
Financial Audit Guidelines Subcommittee meeting, Stockholm, Sweden. 

September 10-14: 
32nd EUROSAI Governing Board meeting, Switzerland. 

October 1-6: 
17th OLACEFS Governing Board meeting, Dominican Republic. 

November 5-10: 
19th INCOSAI and 56th and 57th INTOSAI Governing Board meetings, 
Mexico City, Mexico. 

TBD = To be determined. 

Editor's Note: This calendar is published in support of INTOSAI's 
communications strategy and as a way of helping INTOSAI members plan 
and coordinate schedules. Included in this regular Journal feature 
will be INTOSAI-wide events and regionwide events such as congresses, 
general assemblies, and board meetings. Because of limited space, the 
many training courses and other professional meetings offered by the 
regions cannot be included. For additional information, contact the 
Secretary General of each regional working group. 

[End of January 2007 Journal]