In our 2002 Spring Report (pages 93-108), we concluded that Finance adequately supported a learning culture to improve public performance reporting by departments with two exceptions. We made two
recommendations.
On October 24, 2002, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts concurred with the recommendations.
We recommended that Finance give departments a multi-year timetable with targets for incremental improvement in performance plans and reports of results.
In 2003, Finance created a timetable to guide gradual improvements in all departments’public plans and reports.
We recommended that Finance be proactive to establish a web site or intranet among departments to communicate best practices from research and innovations for improved performance management and reporting.
At the time of our follow-up in October 2005,Finance’s public web site, provided departments with guidelines for planning and reporting. The web site listed responses to frequently asked questions. For example, Finance outlines the Government policy for handling reports about
multi-department strategies such asKidsFirst. The web site also listed Internet links to the web sites of agencies in Canada and the United States that provide advice or that use sound practices for public reporting.
Sharing these resources is important as it saves time and money. The web site creates a central focus for departments to share resources that they find helpful. We encourage Finance to make these resource
materials more visible on its web site for easy access, and to continue to share innovations for improving performance management and reporting.
Main points...146 Introduction...147 Our audit conclusions and findings ...148 Conditions that allowed loss of public money...149 Control over capital assets needed...150 Collection processes needed...151 Control over bank accounts needed ...152 Contingency planning needed ...152 Compliance with theFinancial Administration Manual needed ...153 Operator Certification Board...154 Board needs to adequately monitor operations...155 Processes to regulate quality of drinking water ...155 Background ...155 Responsibility for drinking water...156 Regulating drinking water quality ...157 Our audit objective...157 Our audit conclusion...158 Our key findings (by criterion) and recommendations ...158 Establish standards and procedures to evaluate drinking water quality...158 Monitor drinking water quality using standards and procedures ...159 Act on monitoring results and complaints...162 Selected references...164
Main points
In our 2005 Report–Volume 1 and prior reports, we made recommendations for the Department to improve its processes to safeguard public resources. The Department has not fully addressed these recommendations. Accordingly, the control deficiencies we reported in those reports continued during 2005. Also, in 2005 the Department did not prepare complete and accurate financial statements as required by theFinancial Administration Manual.
In 2005, we examined the Department’s processes to regulate the quality of drinking water. Access to clean and safe drinking water is essential for public health and well-being. The Department is the agency primarily responsible to carry out the Government’s Safe Drinking WaterStrategy that includes action plans to deal with the risks related to drinking water.
We concluded that the Department had adequate processes to regulate the quality of drinking water, except that it needs to document its quality control reviews of waterworks inspections and follow up water quality monitoring results.
Introduction
The Department of Environment (Department) is responsible for managing,enhancing,and protecting the Province’s naturaland environmental resources and sustaining them for future generations.
Information aboutthe Department’s mandate and its organizational structure is available on its web site (http://www.se.gov.sk.ca/).
For the year ended March 31, 2005,the Government’s summary financial statements show environment and natural resource expenses of $154 million (2004 - $186 million) comprised of the following:
(in millions of dollars)
2005 2004
Department of Environment
(2004-05 Public Accounts–Volume 1) $ 133 $ 178 Deduct expenses shown as:
Economic development related to forests (13) (10) Community development related to
urban parks (4) (4)
Add expenses incurred by:
Saskatchewan Water Corporation 25 12
Saskatchewan Watershed Authority 13 12
Other - 1
Restatement–tangible capital assets - (3)
$ 154 $ 186
The Department received $133 million (2004–$178 million) from the General Revenue Fund for its programs. Also, the Department recorded other revenue of $50 million (2004 - $64 million). The Department raises revenue from licences and permit fees for fishing, gaming, and forestry. It also collects non-refundable deposits on beverage containers. Also, the Department raises revenue and incurs expenses through its funds listed on page 148.
Information aboutthe Department’s revenues and expenses appears in the Department’s 2004-05 annual report, (see http://www.se.gov.sk.ca).
The Department’smajor programs and spending include:
Original Estimates Actual (Millions of dollars)
Administration $ 14 $ 15
Compliance and Field Services 22 17
Forest Ecosystems 13 14
Fire Management and Forest Protection 65 32
Resource Stewardship 7 7
Environmental Protection 12 15
Water Management and Protection 9 9
Parks 13 13
Other 7 11
$ 162 $ 133
The Department is responsible for managing the following special purpose and revolving funds (funds) and Crown agencies:
Commercial Revolving Fund
Fish and Wildlife Development Fund
Forest Fire Contingency Fund
Resource Protection and Development Revolving Fund
Operator Certification Board
Saskatchewan Watershed Authority
Water Appeal Board
Our audit conclusions and findings
We worked with Meyers Norris PennyLLP, the appointed auditor for the Saskatchewan Watershed Authority, and Mintz & Wallace, the appointed auditor for the Operator Certification Board, to form our opinions. We used the framework recommended in theReport of the Task Force on Roles, Responsibilities, and Duties of Auditors(see our web site at http://www.auditor.sk.ca/rrd.html). Our Office and the appointed auditors formed the following opinions.
In our opinion, for the year ended March 31, 2005:
the Department and its Crown agencies had adequate rules and procedures to safeguard public resources except for the matters described in this chapter
the Department and its Crown agencies complied with the authorities governing their activities relating to financial reporting, safeguarding public resources, revenue raising, spending, borrowing, and investing except for the matters described in this chapter
the financialstatements ofthe Department’s fundsand Crown agencies are reliable
Later in this chapter, we also report the results of our audit of the Department’s processes to regulate quality ofdrinking water.