The Speaker of the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia, Prof. Dr Slavica Djukic-Dejanovic, set Thursday, 25 March 2010, starting at 11 a.m., as a Day to respond to deputies’ questions regarding the current issue: Financial effects, execution and control over the Republic of Serbia 2008 Budget, proposed by the Deputy Group For European Serbia.

The questions were answered by the Prime Minister of the Republic of Serbia Mirko Cvetkovic, Minister of Finance Diana Dragutinovic, Minister of Education Zarko Obradovic and Chairman of the Council of the State Audit Institution Radoslav Sretenovic.

The questions were posed by deputies Nada Kolundzija, Velimir Ilic, Cedomir Jovanovic, Zoran Kasalovic, Tomislav Nikolic, Suzana Grubjesic, Zoran Krasic, Dragoljub Micunovic, Slobodan Maras, Djordje Milicevic, Jorgovanka Tabakovic, Vladimir Ilic, Vladan Jeremic, Branka Ljiljak, Vesna Pesic, Dragan Stevanovic, Jelena Trivan, Lidija Dimitrijevic, Milan Vuckovic, Dejan Mirovic, Gorica Mojovic and Marina Toman.

Deputy Nada Kolundzija stressed that, due to the importance of controlling public finances, the National Assembly passed a Law and elected the State Audit Institution. Since the Law does not stipulate that the National Assembly discuss the SAI Report in plenum, but it falls into the purview of the competent Committee, calling a National Assembly sitting on this issue is useful as it lends support to the SAI, as well as fully informs the citizens on what the State Auditor has done and discovered. She asked Prime Minister Mirko Cvetkovic whether the Government fully cooperated with the SAI assisted it and provided all information necessary for the State Auditor to complete the audit.

Answering, Prime Minister Mirko Cvetkovic stressed that a state audit was essential for the democratisation of the society and added that the Government cooperated with the Auditor from the very beginning. He stated that the Government had done all that was expected and did not exert any pressure.

Deputy Nada Kolundzija asked the SAI Council Chairman Radoslav Sretenovic whether there had been any political pressure or attempts to influence his work, and asked an additional question of the Prime Minister whether the irregularities the SAI noticed were something inherited from the previous period or incurred in 2008.

SAI Council Chairman confirmed that the SAI suffered no pressure from any of the participants in the audit, political parties, the Government or state bodies. They enjoyed a high level of cooperation, however insufficient staff was an obstacle, which was why the audit did not cover a larger number of subjects. The Prime Minister stressed that the Audit Report pointed out certain irregularities. The statistics performed by his cabinet showed that the structure of offenses, in 55 cases, was such that it related to the violation of the Ordinance on budgetary accounting in 17 cases; violation of the Budgetary System Law in 19 cases; violation of the Public Debt Law in 4 cases; violation of the Labour Law in 11 cases; violation of the Public Procurement Law in 3 cases and violation of the Law on Salaries of Civil Servants in one case. In 49 of the cases were repeat offenses, while 6 of them were a first offense, so it was concluded that this was mostly a matter of established practice.

Deputy Velimir Ilic asked the Prime Minister how stable a Government where the Ministers of Finance and Economy had completely opposite opinions could be.

The Prime Minister answered that reading the 2008 Audit Report he did not notice that the Minister of Finance and Minister of Economy had different opinions. He added that there were no different opinions in principle, in view of the fact that one opinion related to the period of crisis and emerging from the crisis, and the other to how the country’s budgetary and economic policies should be pursued.

Deputy Ilic asked the SAI Council Chairman to look into Nuba Invest company’s contract on the passage of optical cables by the motorway for which RATEL claims they have no license, and PE Serbian Roads did not grant permission for the work. He asked how it was possible that someone might sell a public resource where the annual income would reach 100 million EUR without a tender.

The SAI Council Chairman thanked the deputy for the information and stressed that he would keep it in mind during the audit once the sector for the audit of public enterprises was established and asked him to forward the documentation to the SAI.

Deputy Cedomir Jovanovic deemed the readiness to discuss this issue as good, but all that followed the Auditor’s report as bad, particularly in view of the Finance Committee’s conclusion that a National Assembly sitting should be convened to seriously discuss the issue. He added that from 2002 to the present day the National Assembly had not discussed the end-of-year financial statement of the Republic of Serbia budget and asked the Prime Minister what he had done to resolve the situation, as well as what he had done on the systemic solution of the problem considering that only 5 ministries have internal control.

Prime Minister Mirko Cvetkovic responded that the end-of-year financial statement of the 2005, 2006 and 2007 budget had been handed in and that the Government had adopted them, but the National Assembly did not discuss them because there was no auditor’s report, so they were withdrawn from procedure. In the meantime, the auditing sphere was formally regulated, but due to the SAI’s capacities an audit of only part of the end-of-year financial statement of the 2008 budget was completed, and the previous end-of-year financial statements were not covered. He deemed that this speaks of the importance of the SAI and the need to assist it to build up its capacities. Responding to the question about internal control, the Prime Minister stated that it was a systemic issue and that the Auditor’s Report points out to a lack of internal control. He added that the problem was currently being dealt with and announced that internal control would be instituted in all the ministries very soon.

In an additional question, deputy Cedomir Jovanovic requested an answer about the responsibilities and measures to be implemented regarding the 150 million EUR worth of loans to public enterprises taken form the privatisation and never repaid.

Responding to the additional question the Prime Minister pointed out that it related to one of the offenses noted by the audit, declaring it a continuous process underway for two decades. Granting loans to public enterprises as assistance without requesting a refund, blocking said enterprises of declaring them insolvent has a social character and the problem is being worked on. Minister of Finance Diana Dragutinovic added that the practice of loans i.e. subsidies dates back to the 1990s, stating that they were more often subsidies, which was the auditors’ remark. She stated that the loans were not written off, although they could have been, and that maybe in the process of restructuring, funds might be found to repay them.

Deputy Zoran Kasalovic stressed that he believes the beginning of the SAI’s operation very important as it resulted in the first Report on the budgetary end-of-year financial statement and expressed pleasure at its being connected to the present convocation of the Assembly and Finance Committee which fully supports the SAI. He asked the Minister of Education Zarko Obradovic how much the fact the Ministry of Education was lead by two Governments in 2008 affected the result of the audit.

Minister Obradovic stated that he was one of the ministers that had charges pressed against. He stressed that he was satisfied that there was an SAI report because the Ministry of Education has the largest number of beneficiaries who want to know how the state money was being spent. He deemed that it was the way the Ministry operated and added that, as far as the Ministry of Education was concerned, the SAI’s Report was positive because it stated that the financial reports give a truthful overview and adhered to the regulations implemented in the Republic of Serbia.

Deputy Kasalovic asked two additional questions, one of Radoslav Sretenovic, SAI Council Chairman and the other of Minister of Finance Diana Dragutinovic. He asked how much the SAI was ready to effect the introduction of an internal control system in all budgetary beneficiaries where the law stipulates it and requested the Minister of Finance’s opinion on the need to introduce fiscal rules in public expenditure.

Radoslav Sretenovic stressed that internal control and audit is a complex process and that the law envisages that it should be implemented only in certain direct budgetary beneficiaries. Out of 25 direct beneficiaries only 5 have an internal control system, while 20 do not. 18 beneficiaries were obligated to institute internal audits, 6 of which did, while 11 did not. The introduction of internal control and audits in direct budgetary beneficiaries began in 2009 which was an effect of the SAI’s Report, Sretenovic stated.

Minister Dragutinovic stressed that the SAI can implement three types of control: financial control, control that shows whether the expenses were made for the purposes allowed by the Budget Law and control that shows whether the tax payers receive value for the money invested. If the SAI could implement the third type of control in Serbia, there would be no need for the Fiscal Responsibility Law. She announced that the Ministry of Finance in cooperation with the IMF was working on amending the Budget System Law which would cover fiscal responsibility.

Deputy Tomislav Nikolic made several objections to the regularity of the National Assembly sitting and the type of irregularities the Auditor observed auditing the end-of-year financial statement of the Republic of Serbia 2008 budget.

The National Assembly Speaker informed the deputies that the sitting was convened in line with article 48 of the Law on the National Assembly. The Prime Minister listed several examples of funds expended and funds allocated by the budget rebalance at the National Assembly. He deemed that the Report did not establish intent or premeditation to gain illegal property gain and that misdemeanor charges relate to misdemeanor procedures, and not an intention to rob the citizens.

In the additional time deputy Nikolic pointed out that the Prime Minister personally was the most responsible for a lot of failed privatisations and stressed that he would, once the manner of privatisations was investigated, be the object of numerous charges and prosecutorial investigations. He also criticised the Auditor for not saying anything on how the budgetary funds were being spent.

In his answer, the Prime Minister repeated that the budget did not spend more funds than those planned and approved by the National Assembly.

Deputy Suzana Grubjesic stated that the discussion on the SAI’s report was completed at a Finance Committee sitting and added that all the independent bodies answerable to the National Assembly should be cultivated and preserved. She deemed that the SAI always had the National Assembly’s support and that the audit should cover all the ministries and public enterprises. She also pointed out that slip-ups were the result of the lack of a law and legal regulations, also adding that she did not hear the Auditor point out how they may be remedied. She also asked what criteria were employed to choose the ministries to be audited and when the rest of the ministries would be audited.

The SAI Council Chairman responded that due to its limited resources the SAI could not give an opinion on all the ministries. The method employed to choose the audit subjects came from the standards for the election of audit subjects, and the most important criteria was materiality i.e. share of the beneficiary’s current expenditure in the total budgetary expenditure higher than 3%; amounts of all budgetary beneficiaries higher than 2 million RSD, as well as the criteria of certain risky areas, primarily contractual services.

In her additional question deputy Grubjesic requested information on the SAI’s intentions for the rest of the year and whether it would be auditing public enterprises.

Radoslav Sretenovic responded that the SAI was obliged to give a 2010 programme which it did in December of 2009. SAI decided to audit the end-of-year financial statement of the Republic of Serbia budget, the NBS business transactions, local self-governments, public enterprises and social benefits funds, but the SAI is unable to provide professional staff so is unable to plan the control of public enterprises. He reminded the deputies that the SAI had submitted an initiative to the Finance Committee to amend the Law on the SAI so that the institution would receive the appropriate staff and do reports on local self-governments and public enterprises.

Deputy Zoran Krasic reiterated some of the statements from the Auditor’s Report and asked what was being done to remedy the flaws and whether the main treasury book was being corrected.

In her answer, Minister of Finance Diana Dragutinovic briefed the deputies on the main treasury book. She stated that the current Government had inherited the information system which was a donation and which contained the module of the main treasury book. She said that there were two ways to execute the budget, to make payments from one location and not to make payments from one location. The existent system supports direct budgetary beneficiaries and payments are made from several locations, which is the system supported by the main treasury book. She also stressed that it was true that there was one budgetary end-of-year financial statement before the audit and one after the audit and stated that there was a small statistical error regarding the issue of what was cash and what was financial equivalent. Prime Minister Mirko Cvetkovic stated that the establishment of internal controls has only just begun and that they would be established in due time.

In his additional time Krasic requested an answer to the question who was responsible for the two cases of overdraft of the loans granted from the consolidated treasury account amounting to 60% of the daily balance status on the previous day and also why the funds were not repaid by the end of the budget year.

Minister Dragutinovic said that, according to her, internal loans were considered public debt, adding that they were repaid regularly when the budget has a surfeit of funds and that there was no loan older than 60 days. She also added that the rulebook has been changed and that loans are now being repaid on a daily basis, so as to allow better cash management. The Prime Minister repeated that the SAI Report did not establish any intent or actions that might seem criminal. Radoslav Sretenovic stressed that he had raised charges against the Treasury Department Director due to the loan repayment irregularities.

Deputy Dragoljub Micunovic asked whether the Government controlled the funds spent by the various organisations it funds.

Minister Dragutinovic said that the control function is still in an early phase, budgetary inspection implements control but its function weakens with the strengthening of the SAI. It has a plan and programme, manages risk and implements control where there is suspicion of unauthorised spending of funds.

Deputy Micunovic’s additional question related to the control over the expenditure of the funds the Government sent for the renewal of monasteries in Kosovo-Metohija and the construction of St. Sava Temple.

In her response, the Minister of Finance repeated that it was a matter of the budgetary inspection’s capacity and its plan and programme.

Deputy Slobodan Maras pointed out the violations listed in the SAI Report, non-existence of internal control in the ministries and the withdrawal of the budgetary end-of-year report and asked what would be done with the people responsible, above all at the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy which had the most irregularities, as well as why the SAI had raised no charges against Minister Rasim Ljajic, but it did against his assistants.

The Prime Minister agreed that the ministries must have internal control, reminded the deputy that the end-of-year financial statement of the 2008 budget was withdrawn due to the auditor’s complaint to the manner the exchange rate changes were accounted and repeated that, apart from that, there were no other corrections to the budgetary end-of-year financial statement. He also repeated that the charges raised are ones for the lowest type of violation and opined that they do not necessitate a ministerial resignation because there was no intent of personal gain.

Deputy Maras’s additional question related to the privatisation funds that went to public enterprises and were never repaid. He asked the SAI Chairman for a control of public enterprises and political parties.

SAI Council Chairman Radoslav Sretenovic stressed that the Minister of Labour and Social Policy authorised his assistants in line with the law which is why no charges were raised against him. Regarding the audit of political parties, SAI will be able to control the budgetary funds granted to the political parties once it recruits new staff. Minister Dragutinovic stressed that there was no” disappearance” of donations adding that it was the result of a discrepancy between the Ministry of Finance and NBS’s records. The Ministry of Finance registers all donations that enter the country in both cash and kind for both budgetary beneficiaries and the non-government sector, while the NBS only registers the foreign currency influx from the donations it manages.

Deputy Djordje Milicevic stressed that SPS-UN Deputy Group supports the SAI’s work and management of public finance. He asked if and how much the Government had assisted the SAI’s work, whether it had done something regarding the status of the auditors and that it was not good for the Report to appear in public before it appeared before the Finance Committee. He also asked if the practice can be changed in that regard in order to raise the National Assembly’s, the Finance Committee and SAI’s reputation.

Minister of Education Zarko Obradovic stated that the Government had contributed to the SAI’s work, that it accepted the Report and its objections very realistically and estimated them as a good basis to correct the irregularities in the upcoming period by passing new rules and laws. Radoslav Sretenovic said that presenting the Report first to the public and then to the Committee, helped to avoid possible influence on the SAI and reminded the deputies that this is common practice in the world, adding that the report was first submitted to the National Assembly and then presented to the public. He also estimated that the SAI had the Government’s support and that after two years it has been given facilities, but that these days they are not sufficient for its operation. He requested support for the amendments to the Law on the SAI which would improve the auditors’ material status. The Minister of Finance added that the due to the nature of its work the SAI had the most work at the Treasury Directorate which tried to provide it with the best possible working conditions. The Ministry of Finance understands the importance of the SAI and the Anti-Corruption Agency which is reflected in the fact that it is in favour of the SAI being provided with higher funds to employ new auditors.

Deputy Jorgovanka Tabakovic requested an answer to the question of control over the NBS i.e. the Institute for Manufacturing Banknotes and Coins which, according to her, stands to earn 30 to 40 million EUR from the printing of health care cards and asked whether the NBS had ever paid the profit earned into the Government’s account.

The Minister of Finance replied that the NBS has not made any payments for 2008, but that a payment of 2-3 billion RSD of profit earned in 2009 is expected. Radoslav Sretenovic pointed out that near the end of 2008 a retroactive contract was signed regarding funds on the basis of 2.5% interest paid and received at NBS. These funds were transferred and since the contract was concluded retroactively they could not raise the appropriate charges.

Asking her additional question deputy Tabakovic requested information on what grounds would the mint earn 30/40 million EUR by violating the Law on Public Procurement, abusing its monopoly position and performing its business activity.

The Prime Minister pointed out that the National Assembly was the place to which independent institutions including NBS are answerable, that the information on the institution’s operations is insufficient and advised deputy Tabakovic to forward the question to the NBS.

Deputy Vladimir Ilic asked whether there the SAI’s had experienced any pressure in its work, when the institution was expected to reach full capacity and what the conditions for it were. He added that in the purpose of improving operations, the institutions should be ordered to introduce international standards of quality and responsibility of those being audited.

The SAI Council Chairman stated that in line with regulations the SAI has formed 6 sectors, and according to systematisation 85 auditors’ positions and 29 other jobs. On two occasions, in 2008 and 2009, it employed 4 authorised auditors, 1 associate, 1 junior associate and 1 state auditor. He expressed an expectation that the improvement of material conditions would enable the SAI to reach full capacity so that over 9 000 budgetary beneficiaries could become subject to its audit.

Asking an additional question, deputy Ilic stated that permanent education of the staff employed by the SAI should be instituted, and answering the question Radoslav Sretenovic said that it is the SAI’s legal duty, as well as the licensing of auditors and announced that by the end of June this year the SAI would adopt a Plan of staff education and auditor licensing.

Deputy Vladan Jeremic estimated that the sitting fails to debate the specific measures to be implemented regarding the SAI’s Report and stressed that there is no resolution to start a serious fight against corruption. He pointed out the issues of budgetary loans, drawing loans to cover the budgetary deficit, donations, payments of guarantees and measures to recover outstanding debts and asked for an explanation.

Responding to the questions, Minister Dragutinovic repeated that the problem with donations stems from different databases and advised the deputy to verify it at the Ministry of Finance, adding that so far no donor complained that the that the donated funds had not been appropriately spent. Regarding guarantees she stated that the Ministry of Finance has implemented the appropriate legal measures. A great number of public enterprises had drawn loans with the Republic of Serbia as guarantor, and in only two cases in 2008 did the state pay the interest to the guarantee i.e. in the case of PE Railroads and PE Serbian Roads. In 2009/2010 it only pays for PE Railroad which is actually a subsidy, the Minister of Finance stated. The SAI Council Chairman repeated that the SAI had launched an initiative to amend the Law on SAI with the Finance Committee which unanimously endorsed it, but that to date he received no information when it would enter assembly procedure.

Deputy Jeremic’s additional question pertained to the repayment of the inappropriately used funds into the budget of the City of Belgrade by order of the Finance Ministry’s budgetary inspection.

Responding to the question, Prime Minister Cvetkovic said that it neither pertained to the republic budget nor the period being discussed.

Deputy Branka Ljiljak asked whether any mechanisms have been found to harmonise the differences in exchange in the drafting of the end-of-year financial statement of the 2009 budget.

Minister Dragutinovic responded that differences in exchange are cash equivalents and that they have been now harmonised, so the error shall not reappear.

As an additional question deputy Ljiljak asked whether the SAI believed that some responsible persons had obtained material gain.

Radoslav Sretenovic said that 19 charges have been brought for an amount of over 141 billion RSD, over 70% of which related to the violation of the Budgetary System Law. They did not confirm the occurrence of any violations that might bear criminal liability or that material gain was obtained.

Deputy Vesna Pesic stated that the audit of the budgetary end-of-year financial statement was a serious topic and issue related to whether Serbia has a serious state or not. She added that the SAI Report can be treated as a dress rehearsal considering that it covered only part of the expenditure of budgetary funds. She also said that the auditor refrained from giving an opinion in the Report and asked when he would be able to give an opinion, as well as how it was possible that a lack of resources resulted in the absence of the auditor’s full estimate.

Radoslav Sretenovic responded that the process of setting up SAI as an institution was difficult and that the SAI would be able to expand the coverage of the audit and give its opinion on the budgetary end-of-year financial statement when it has the capacities for it. She announced that then the SAI would be able to deal with corruptive activities in the expenditure of budgetary funds.

Deputy Pesic’s additional question related to the accounting system, main treasury book and internal control system. Minister Dragutinovic repeated that Serbia did not have a treasury and that it was currently being created. The treasury is supported by an inherited information system that supports only direct budgetary beneficiaries.

Deputy Dragan Stevanovic asked the state auditor whether he considered supportive everything he heard from the representatives of the ruling majority, whether after this session his work would be easier and whether he would be able o do his job according to European standards.

Radoslav Sretenovic expressed hope that he would have support, which was confirmed by the National Assembly’s Finance Committee when it accepted the initiative to amend the Law on SAI.

Deputy Stevanovic also asked the SAI Council Chairman when he would have the strength to enter public enterprises on the local level, and the Prime Minister which inspection was in charge of price control of communal enterprises on the local level.

The SAI Council Chairman responded that, after setting up a sector for the audit of public enterprises, he would commence an audit on the entire territory of Serbia and announced the opening of SAI organisational units in bigger Serbian centres starting from 2011. Prime Minister Cvetkovic stressed that price control is a painful issue in a market economy adding that in the long term the state should withdraw from the market. He also mentioned some technical information regarding price formation.

Deputy Jelena Trivan was interested in the issues regarding property, primarily the statements that the Property Directorate lacks full registry of the situation in state property. She asked the Prime Minister how it was possible that the Republic of Serbia has no registry list of its property, as well as what the contracts for the renting of state property were like, whether the situation today was better and whether the public enterprises’ state property was being recorded.

The Prime Minister said that it was a fact that the property Directorate had no property register and for two reasons – one is of an organisational nature, an the other resulted from the Law on Assets Owned by the Republic according to which the property of public enterprises does not belong to them but to the Republic. A property registry is being currently compiled and databases created, parallel to which the adequacy of its use is being analysed.

Deputy Trivan was also interested in the leasing of property to foreign representative offices, as well as statements that property was being leased to local party representatives under more favourable conditions, and whether those contracts had been analysed.

Prime Minister Cvetkovic responded that an analysis has been done and that the report demonstrates that real estate was being leased below market price. A group has been formed to renegotiate the prices, but the fact that some of the contracts were concluded with a fixed lease date was a limiting factor, so prices were altered where possible. The difference is 2 million EUR, so that Dipos income in 2008 amounted to 50 million RSD, and in 2009 somewhat more than 200 million RSD. The Minister of Finance added that the impression that there is no registry of public assets is not correct, and that a centralised registration is being worked on.

Deputy Lidija Dimitrijevic was dissatisfied that all the ministers whose work had been covered by the SAI report and where irregularities were discovered were not present at the session. She asked the Prime Minister who were the employers who unjustifiably increased the income of an employed pregnant woman in the period of four months preceding the month of commencement of maternity leave which influenced the realisation of their right to compensation during maternity leave, baby care leave and special baby care leave.

Answering the questions, Prime Minister Cvetkovic said that they will be forwarded to the competent ministry.

Deputy Dimitrijevic asked the Minister of Finance whether she still maintained that the deputies should not believe all they read in the SAI Report.

The Minister responded that the sentence had been taken out of context and that the deputies doubted everything about the Government’s work, except the SAI Report. She stated that it was impossible to find a single thing in which everyone was of the same opinion and repeated that she still did not believe that internal loans could be considered public debt.

Before granting deputy Milan Vuckovic the floor, the Chair, Gordana Comic informed the deputies that they had received the resignation of Milan Djokic to the post of deputy and the Administrative Committee’s Report, and that, at the Administrative Committee’s proposal, the National Assembly noted the termination of term of office before the expiration of the term he was elected to of deputy Milan Djokic elected from the For European Serbia – Boris Tadic electoral list.

In the continuation, deputy Milan Vuckovic asked whether it was true that ministry funds were forwarded to political parties and tycoon companies. The SAI Council Chairman said that an inappropriate usage of funds had not been confirmed. He said that funds had been transferred under service contracts to certain legal entities, but he was unable to say whether they were tycoons. He added that charges had been raised in cases where contractual law was not observed and that they did not confirm that funds had been transferred to political parties.

In his address deputy Dejan Mirovic concluded that there had been pressures on the SAI’s work and stated that the Report deals with peripheral matters, not real corruption.

Radoslav Sretenovic responded that the SAI Report was a turning point in public finance and repeated the information on the manner and methods of selection of audit subjects, stating that he hoped the violations noticed would not be repeated.

Deputy Gorica Mojovic deemed that the Report would act preventively on all who handle state funds. She asked what the criteria for the selection of ministries to be controlled were, as well as the criteria for selecting the type of expenditure controlled and criteria for the selection of control subjects.

The SAI Council Chairman said that three standards were used in the selection process and that the selection was not random.

Deputy Mojovic asked who made the decision, foregoing the Government, to sign a contract for additional 10 million RSD for the palaces from position 424, when it is common knowledge that 20 million RSD have already been allocated in the budget for the purpose.

Radoslav Sretenovic responded that there was a Governmental decision and budget rebalance on the payment of additional 10 million RSD from position 424.

Deputy Marina Toman asked Radoslav Sretenovic what the reasons to do work that gave only partial results were, why he constantly claimed that there were no conditions for a more detailed audit if there had been no political pressures and what about auditing public enterprises.

Radoslav Sretenovic repeated that are no political pressures on the SAI nor had there been any during the audit. Regarding audits in public enterprises he stated that all public enterprises are legally obliged to be audited by an independent auditor, for now by a commercial auditor. Public enterprises had not been audited by the SAI due to a lack of staff in the sector, which also goes for local self-governments.

Having gone through the list of deputies who applied to ask questions on the current issue, the National Assembly Speaker Prof. Dr Slavica Djukic-Dejanovic thanked the Prime Minister, Ministers of Finance and Education and SAI Council Chairman on the behalf of the deputies and herself for participating and expressed hope that the public and the deputies have received adequate answers to the questions on the topic.