4.2 Report of the Audit Committee 4.2.1 The Audit Committee agreed with the AGSA's findings, and assured the Committee that it had proposed various interventions to address the challenges identified, but that the DCS had failed to implement them. The Audit Committee chairperson confirmed that had these been implemented, the 2012/13 audit outcome would have been markedly different. 4.2.2 The following Audit Committee recommendations were not implemented: little was done to ensure that correctional centres, areas and regions implemented appropriate systems to ensure greater reliability of the information provided to national management, the internal audit unit was not able to review performance information on a quarterly basis; there was no consequence management for those who provided incorrect information; and annual performance plans were not aligned to the DCS strategic plan, budget and/or core functions. 4.2.3 The DCS' perceived resistance to independent oversight is evidenced by the relationship it has had with its audit committees. In the past three years, the DCS has had four audit committee chairpersons, two of whom were removed as chairpersons without consultation and/or prior notice. At present the Audit Committee comprises three members only, and sorely requires additional members with human resource-, legal- and operational expertise. 4.2.4 The Committee has noted with concern, that despite communication in 2012 from the then Chief Audit Executive, and the affected audit committee members, about the termination of the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson's contracts in July of that year, the annual report indicated that they had resigned. The terminations had occurred shortly after the Committee had received reports from the then Audit Committee that detailed challenges identified in relation to the continued IT- challenges, inaccurate reporting on performance information, poor risk management, and failure by the DCS to properly remedy challenges identified by AGSA. It is noted that the very concerns raised by the those members of the audit committee whose contracts had been terminated, are the ones that had resulted in the DCS poor audit outcome in 2012/13. 4.2.5 Following its 2011/12 audit, the AGSA had identified 451 matters that required attention, and for which an audit action plan had to be developed. The final audit action plan was not submitted to the Audit Committee, supposedly because the Deputy Commissioner: ICC had resigned. 4.2.6 As stated above the DCS' Audit Committee concurred with the AGSA's assessment of the DCS 2012/13 performance. In a written submission to the Committee, the Audit Committee reiterated that the DCS had to change its attitude towards external and internal audit, and that it had to foster a organisational culture that recognised that internal control was a department-wide responsibility, and not only that of its finance unit. 5. RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee requests that the Minister of Correctional Services (the Minister) ensures that the following recommendations are considered, and where possible, implemented. It should be noted that the concerns raised in previous Committee oversight, and BRR reports, have in the main not been addressed and therefore remain.