Auditor-General Tan Sri Ambrin Buang said as a whole, the National Audit Department has found the Federal Government's Public Accounts Statement balanced and reflective of the government's financial standing last year.

It also found accounting records to be properly maintained.

However, in auditing the management of finances, the department found that a few financial laws were not met.

In some areas, manpower and training in financial management were lacking, and monitoring and supervision was absent.

In tackling these weaknesses, Ambrin has introduced the Accountability Index ranking system.
The Prime Minister's Department emerged tops in financial management amongst the ministries last year, with a score of about 90 per cent, to become a 'role model'.

The Department was the only one which merited the 'excellent' distinction.

The Ministry with the worst performance was the Internal Security Ministry (now under the Home Ministry ambit), with a 60-something point.

As for departments, five got top marks, one of which was the Public Service Department.

Under the ranking system, the ministry/department was ranked in management, budget, receivables, and expenditure controls; trust funds management; and asset, inventory and store management.

All 28 ministries were audited, but only 31 of 110 federal departments were inspected due to lack of resources.

Ambrin hoped that ministries and departments would now be more motivated to improve on their performance with the ranking system put in place.

Besides that, the National Audit Department has also continued on with its "Adoption Programme" which was introduced four years ago.

Through this programme, offices identified to be facing problems in financial management would be given guidance in ways to improve its keeping of accounting records.

The 12 offices chosen last year to undergo this programme have shown improvements.

The A-G has also recommended that an audit committee be set up by supervisors to take on corrective and preventive actions in the issues raised by the department.

An additional surcharge might also be placed on those who failed to collect funds or who have made payments in a disorganised manner.

A surcharge can also be imposed on a supervising officer or head of department if a subordinate failed to carry out their duties.