Economic Empowerment
Vast majority of rural women remain outside the mainstream of the economy and audit shows they continue to be cheatedDemocrat
Details emerging from the General Auditing Commission (GAC) released audit of the women's political outfit, the Ministry of Gender and Development, reveal how many projects designed to benefit rural women fell under clouds of misappropriation.
The audit, initially resisted by the Ministry with street protests that hauled in rural women as being against the probe, is packed with references on how funds meant for rural women simply disappeared.
Although auditors have recommended that some officials at the Ministry, including Minister Varbah Gayflor, refund several hundreds thousands of dollars, this is unlikely based on previous recommendations. The audit's results suggest the need other more accountable and transparent channels in assisting rural and disadvantaged women overcome postwar economic and social hurdles.
Revelations in the General Auditing Commission (GAC) audit on the Ministry of Gender and Development are disturbing for one main reason: women are accused of abusing other women when it comes to economic opportunities and empowerment, the all enticing slogans that mesmerize many around the globe. It is no longer the bigotry men determined to keep women down. It is women against women, and the facts make this so evident.
From the onset of this audit, some women, speedily organized, stormed the streets in protest. They wanted no audit and even asked God the powerful to strike down the one behind the audit, now gone Auditor General Morlu. God resisted so that the facts can be known.
When from all over the world stormed here to celebrate the advent of one of their kind on the global stage of prominence as Africa's first woman president, the expectations were that the sorry state of their counterparts in far worse economic circumstances.
No one is accusing the able representatives of women of stealing from fellow women far less advantaged, but let us examine some portions of the audit.
The audit: "It was further noted that several payments were made to a vendor totaling US$143,459.00 for procurement of stationery meant for use by NACROG, Rural Women, NGBV Secretariat, Women Colloquium and Women NGO Secretariat. I did not see any evidence indicating that the stationery procured were on the basis of requests made by the intended entities and/or that these organizations actually received the stationery. The implication of this practice is that the payments might not have been used for the intended purpose as contained in the national budget, which could result in unbudgeted expenditure and misappropriation.
Similarly, US$75,000.00 disbursed by the GOL as micro loan to support rural women to improve their economy capacity to become self-reliance and self-esteem was used to hold rural women elections and setting up structures other than the purpose for which the funds were disbursed. This practice amounted to misappropriation of funds and more critically, deprived targeted beneficiaries from improving their economic capacity."
It would seem that rural women could make better use of such huge sum of money than to spend it on stationery. Moreover, as the audit clearly states, they did not ask for stationery. There is no evidence that they received the so-called stationery.
So what happened? Well, their 'book' counterparts at their Ministry of Gender and Development made the decisions for them, insisting that they needed stationery that they did not get.
Here is another one that illustrates the mantra of 'women empowerment,' the international NGO cliché that brings in fast and big money to liberate women from the centuries old oppression of callous men.
The idea, good in paper, was that rural women needed loans to help themselves. So the Ministry of Gender and Development, the women's think-tank, went into action, as the audit reveals:
"The audit further revealed that the MGD prepared a loan package of US$96,523.00 given to counties' organizations and rural women for economic empowerment, as part of the post colloquium activities. The loan paid to beneficiaries covered the period April 2009 to December 2009 and amount totaling US$11,191.00 has since been repaid by beneficiaries from the US$86,532.00 loaned to them, thus leaving the total unpaid amount of US$75,332.00. The deficiency noted in the loan scheme is the result of management failure to safeguard the interest of the GOL in the event of default on the repayment of the loans; this could also prevent others from enjoying same, thus undermining the objects of the Ministry's loan program.
I noted several unsupported expenditures. For instance, payment vouchers totaling US$ 30,861.00 did not have any valid receipts attached to support the expenditure. I could therefore not assure that the aforementioned amount was used for the purposes of the MGD. For instance, I could not establish whether the goods were supplied in the absence of valid supporting documents.
"It was also noted from review of payment vouchers for funds received from donors and GOL that a total of US$355,367.60 checks were written in the name of employees of the Ministry. These payments were made to the employees instead of service providers/vendors and I did not see any evidence on the disbursement of funds to the intended beneficiaries by the employees to whom these checks were paid.
I contacted the employees who the payments were channeled. They claimed the checks were encashed and the bulk amounts brought to the MGD head office and reportedly distributed to the Counties. Again, there was no evidence to validate this assertion."
Again, no one is accusing the women at Gender of stealing from their poorer counterparts. But just as they prayed for God's wrath to fall on those who were questioning on how they spent money intended for their rural counterparts, only God will strike those who stole the above mentioned money dead, since action against them is absolutely unlikely.
Since men by nature are more corrupt than women, as we are told, rural women should consider themselves in more compassionate hands at the Ministry of Gender and Development. But when the audit is further examined, tears cannot be held back. Women ooo women!
"I noted during my audit obvious material issues that a total General Allowance of US$35,576.00 disbursed by the MOF as MGD employees entitlement were not received by the intended beneficiaries and Management could also not account for the funds."
Management in its response stated that ". The disbursing officer of the MoF comes to the Ministry with allowance checks and identifies the beneficiaries of the checks before they sign for the checks. The allowance listing submitted to you without signatures was an issue investigated and adjudicated by the LACC. The LACC advised Management to include the names of all staff on the allowance listing for the submission of the MoF since it wanted all to benefit. This practice has been adhered to since September 2009".
This exchange between officials at the Ministry of Gender and indeed Development concludes Part One with tears:
"It is evidenced by management statement that the general allowance in question was not received by the intended beneficiaries. Given the fact that undocumented expenditure cannot stand as a charge against the Consolidated Account, the expenditure is therefore disallowed by Regulation K¬3 of the PFM Act and accordingly, the officials concerned should be sub¬charged. Management in an attempt to conceal this irregularity, provided photocopies of employees' identification cards to indicate evidence of payments made to the various beneficiaries. But the same beneficiaries provided contradictory information as an attempt to shield their boss. Management was wise in maintaining photo copy identification cards for the beneficiaries as proof of payment but the Account Technician along with the Comptroller, Chief Accountant and other accounting staff of the Gender Ministry were not wise enough to allow the recipients to vouch for payments by signing off in a log book of payments received. Management was able to maintain a listing of beneficiaries for months, but was unable to make the beneficiaries vouch for payments in their names. Management contention cannot be sustained administratively and judicially when challenged on the merit. By Management's assertion that "The allowance listing submitted to you without signatures was an issue investigated and adjudicated by the LACC", in no way preclude me from further investigating this broad day fraud. I don't know the theory used by LCCA in its adjudication, but one thing I am certain is the strength of my evidence. This assertion by Management cannot stand a reasonable person test."
This exchange between officials at the Ministry of Gender and indeed Development concludes Part One with tears.