01.01.2015 Views

June 15, 2009 - District of Mission

June 15, 2009 - District of Mission

June 15, 2009 - District of Mission

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

188<br />

<strong>District</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Mission</strong> — 2008 Audit Results and Communication<br />

Page 9<br />

We recommend that a formal policy be implemented where the IT department reviews user privileges<br />

for systems and MAIS every 6 months.<br />

<strong>District</strong>'s Response: Finance is more conversant than IT in terms <strong>of</strong> MA'S access, therefore has<br />

historically taken on the role <strong>of</strong> MA'S access administration. All MAIS access is periodically<br />

reviewed when setting up new employees, changing passwords or performing other administration.<br />

There has not been a lot <strong>of</strong> employee movement to warrant a more formal approach for reviewing<br />

MAIS access.<br />

IT handles access privileges for our other systems. Access rights are generally established by group<br />

and when a person enters or transfers from a group access rights change. Not a lot <strong>of</strong> employee<br />

movement has occurred at the higher level access areas. We do not see the need for a more formal<br />

approach within MA'S or our other systems at this time.<br />

3. Generic IT user access<br />

Currently a generic username and password is used for printing cheques. Although the username and<br />

password are only known to three Finance staff, there is the issue that cheques printed cannot be<br />

traced back to the individual person who printed the cheques. If unauthorized cheques are printed,<br />

the <strong>District</strong> would not be able to trace the occurrence to a particular staff member and this reduces<br />

accountability.<br />

We recommend that individual usemames and passwords to be setup for each staff member that will<br />

be doing cash disbursements. Therefore, each user will have their own username and password to<br />

print cheques.<br />

<strong>District</strong>'s Response: The accounts payable final cheque register shows the individual person's name<br />

who produced the cheques, as each person signs on to MAIS (from one terminal) with a distinct user<br />

name and password when producing accounts payable cheques. The individual who prints the<br />

cheques also signs <strong>of</strong>f on a manual cheque voucher reconciliation form immediately after printing<br />

cheques. This form, together with the final cheque register, are both signed <strong>of</strong>f by the Director <strong>of</strong><br />

Finance or his designee.<br />

There is currently a programming issue related to the formatting <strong>of</strong> accounts payable cheques,<br />

therefore, the cheques are run on one terminal that has one common user name and password;<br />

however, as noted above individual user names and passwords are required to access MAIS to<br />

actually run accounts payable cheques. The Information Services department will be looking into this<br />

formatting issue.<br />

4. GST<br />

In early 2004 GST legislation was changed to allow municipalities to claim a 100% rebate. Because<br />

<strong>of</strong> this change many supplies made by municipalities became subject to GST, such as licenses for real<br />

property. GST has not been collected on some licenses for real property from the time the legislation<br />

was changed until 2008.<br />

During the audit in 2008, it was found there was approximately $3,505 in amounts owing to CRA for<br />

GST that should have been collected in previous years and in 2008. Although from a financial<br />

statement audit standpoint the amount is not significant, under a CRA audit the <strong>District</strong> could be<br />

assessed interest for the period from when the tax should have been remitted up to the point in time it<br />

is included in a subsequent return.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!