Finance Minister John Dalli did well on Tuesday to explain in some detail his ministry's stand over expenditure by government departments. With the government running such a deficit in its finances, it is only natural that the ministry keeps a watchful eye on what is being spent. This is exactly what the people want to see happening all the time. More than that, there is need on the government's part to reduce waste in expenditure.

There is much to say about this but first let us consider the minister's explanation of the stand on the cost-cutting measures his ministry is taking. He said that last January the ministry pointed out to departments that in the previous year revenues were lower than projected. This had been due to the international recession and local economic problems.

He went on to say that the budget for this year had been calculated on the basis of that revenue and, therefore, one could predict now that there would be another shortfall from projections. In the light of this, ministries were told to commit only 90 per cent of the budgets allocated to them. Does not this make sense? Of course it does. Is it not in the country's interest to ensure that the government's finances do not derail - inasmuch as this is possible given today's circumstances - from the programme the government itself had set?

Yet, funnily enough, it does not seem that the minister's message has been well understood by those who should know better. Mr Dalli is right in feeling angry about the lack of cooperation over his ministry's stand. Indeed, he said, that once government departments had not carried out the exercise requested of them, his ministry had to intervene directly to see how spending could be reduced.

Why should the ministry be constrained to resort to such measures? Should not the heads themselves feel responsible enough to ensure that the ministry's instructions are followed? Mr Dalli did not mince his words: "The fact is, however, that many people in government departments do not care less and once they have a budget, they continue to spend. They are not able to scale back and prioritise when there is need for a rethinking".

The minister's outburst speaks volumes on the level of accountability, or the lack of it, in the public service. But then this does not come entirely as a big surprise to those who are scandalised year after year by what the auditor general finds in his public accounts review presented to parliament.

Taking his latest report, for example, there are the following issues which the auditor general found of particular concern: large arrears of revenue due to the government; large amounts of advances made through the Treasury Clearance Fund remaining outstanding for several years and weak internal controls across government departments resulting in a lack of safeguards of revenue and assets.

Are not these really matters of concern? There are more, such as lack of adherence to regulations governing travel advances and deficiencies in the control of government transport. Some of these complaints have been appearing in the auditor general's reports with such regular monotony that they no longer shock. When is the government going to enforce greater accountability across the board in the service?

The finance minister said in parliament they need to continue being tough on government spending. We say they are not tough enough.