National conference of PAC chairpersons held in Keralam Assembly makes key recommendations to boost audit mechanism
Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla says recommendations from the conference will provide a clear pathway for improving the functioning of PACs and ensure that public money is used efficiently and for the right purpose
360° Perspective Analysis
Deep-dive into Geography, Polity, Economy, History, Environment & Social dimensions — AI-powered, on-demand
Context
The two-day National Conference of Public Accounts Committees (PAC) chairpersons from 25 States recently concluded at the Kerala Assembly. The conference highlighted significant challenges in the auditing mechanism, primarily regarding the timely submission of reports and delayed responses from government departments. Key recommendations included establishing firm timelines for action, conducting joint meetings of Central and State PACs, and creating a digital dashboard to track audits and compliance.
UPSC Perspectives
Polity
The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is one of the three Financial Parliamentary Committees (along with the Estimates Committee and Committee on Public Undertakings). It is arguably the most crucial mechanism for ensuring the executive's financial accountability to the legislature. Formed under the , the PAC at the central level consists of 22 members (15 from Lok Sabha, 7 from Rajya Sabha). Its primary function is to examine the audit reports submitted by the (CAG), which act as a 'friend, philosopher, and guide' to the committee. However, as the conference highlighted, this mechanism is hampered when CAG reports are delayed or not tabled promptly before the House. This delay creates a situation where accountability becomes theoretical, as officials responsible for the expenditure may have retired or transferred by the time the PAC examines the issue. The demand for a robust, time-bound mechanism addresses this core structural weakness in parliamentary oversight.
Governance
A key issue raised at the conference relates to executive compliance and the responsiveness of government ministries and departments. The PAC's effectiveness is severely limited if its queries and recommendations are met with delayed, incomplete, or non-existent replies. This points to a broader governance challenge: the lack of enforceable mechanisms to compel the executive to act on legislative oversight recommendations. The proposal for 'firm, enforceable timelines for replies and implementation' seeks to transition the PAC's role from merely a post-mortem examination of expenditures to an active agent of governance reform. Furthermore, the recommendation to appoint specialized staff trained in public finance and audit acknowledges the increasing complexity of government expenditure, suggesting that the PAC needs technical capacity building to effectively scrutinize modern financial transactions and policies.
Federalism
The conference explicitly addressed the need for coordination in examining Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS). A CSS is funded jointly by the Union and State governments but implemented by the States. The implementation of these schemes often suffers from delays and coordination failures, as cited in the example of the Pre-Matric and Post-Matric Scholarships for Scheduled Caste students. The recommendation for an annual joint committee meeting of Central and State PACs is a novel approach to cooperative federalism in financial oversight. Currently, Central and State PACs operate in silos, examining expenditures within their respective jurisdictions. A joint mechanism could help trace the flow of funds from the Union to the States more effectively, identifying bottlenecks in scheme implementation that currently fall into jurisdictional blind spots between the and State Legislatures.