Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSutherland, S.L.
dc.date.accessioned2016-09-14T18:23:36Z
dc.date.available2016-09-14T18:23:36Z
dc.date.copyrightWorking Paper 23, 2001en_US
dc.date.issued2001-08
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1974/14887
dc.description.abstractThe article describes the nearly year-long political and media uproar that followed on the release in January, 2000 of a qualitative or soft “audit” of management control in the federal government department, Human Resources Development Canada, and analyses the contributing factors. The article argues that the auditors’ examination of project files for programs delivered by grants and contributions was so abstract and poorly executed that nothing whatever can be concluded from the work. Factors that favoured the “scandal” interpretation include across-government New Public Management reforms where accountability has not been re-theorized for Canada’s Westminster system of government; Canada’s electoral volatility that starves the country of experienced politicians and spurs the tradition of political compensation for electoral support; and the political role of the Office of the Auditor General. This paper has been accepted for publication by the journal Critical Perspectives on Accounting, which holds copyright.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesPolicy Studies Working Paper 23en_US
dc.subjectScandalen_US
dc.subjectCanadian Historyen_US
dc.subjectAuditen_US
dc.title"Biggest Scandal in Canadian History": HRDC Audit Starts Probity War (Working Paper 23)en_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record