The main objectives of the conference were to present the current international standards, principles and good European practice with regard to ensuring and demonstrating the relevance of SAIs as well as to identify regional and national challenges and opportunities in the development of the external audit systems. The event was also designed to stimulate the development of more regular consultation between SAIs in the region, either bilaterally or multilaterally, in order to seek information, advice, and models that may inspire and promote their own national reform initiatives.

1. 2 Rue André Pascal
75775 Paris Cedex 16
France
mailto:sigmaweb@oecd.org
Tel: +33 (0) 1 45 24 82 00
Fax: +33 (0) 1 45 24 13 05
www.sigmaweb.org
This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. It should not be reported as
representing the official views of the EU, the OECD or its member countries, or of beneficiaries participating in the
SIGMA Programme. The opinions expressed and arguments employed are those of the author(s).
This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to
the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.
Outcome report
Regional Conference of SAIs of ENI South
Algiers 16-17 December 2014
I. Introduction
On 16-17 December 2014 the first regional conference for Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) of European
Neighbourhood South countries took place in Algiers, Algeria. This conference brought together the SAIs
of six countries of the European Neighbourhood South region (Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco,
Tunisia) and Palestine1
as observer. It provided an opportunity to share recent experiences of the SAIs
concerning their efforts to “make a difference to the lives of citizens”.
The main objectives of the conference were to present the current international standards, principles
and good European practice with regard to ensuring and demonstrating the relevance of SAIs as well as
to identify regional and national challenges and opportunities in the development of the external audit
systems. The event was also designed to stimulate the development of more regular consultation
between SAIs in the region, either bilaterally or multilaterally, in order to seek information, advice, and
models that may inspire and promote their own national reform initiatives.
The agenda of the conference is attached in Annex. Presentations about recent developments and
experience from their countries and from international initiatives were made by each of the participating
SAIs of the region. SIGMA experts from Sweden, Latvia, France and the European Court of Auditors
informed about EU policies and provided examples of good practice. Both afternoons were dedicated to
group discussions about:
1. Challenges of the SAIs of the region concerning:
• Independence and legal framework
• Audit standards and audit process, reporting
• Communication and impact
• Organisation, management and professional development.
2. Recommendations of how to respond to them:
The meeting also provided all participants with the opportunity to meet informally to compare national
experiences and discuss specific issues among peers, and to establish a network for more regular
exchanges. The conference was characterised by very engaged participation of all delegates and lively
discussions in an open, friendly and professional atmosphere.
1
This designation shall not be construed as recognition of a State of Palestine and is without prejudice to the individual
positions of the Member States on this issue.

2. 2
This report is intended to set out the outcomes namely of the group discussions, at the end of which
participants came up with concrete recommendations for activities that could help SAIs in the region to
increase their impact and demonstrate their relevance.
Summary of the welcome address by the President of the Algerian Court of Accounts (CoA)
The president welcomed the participants. The president highlighted examples of recent efforts by the
CdC to apply ISSAI 12, a.o. the code of ethics that was introduced. Lack of methodology tools, improving
audit efficiency and wide sometimes contradictory interpretation of auditing standards were highlighted
by the president as the main challenges for further development.
Summary of the welcome by the representative of the EU Delegation
The Head of operations described the different institution building instruments of the EC, meaning
TAIEX, Twinning and SIGMA, and presented examples of good co-operation with Algeria with the General
financial inspection, the CoA and the tax administration. She especially highlighted the importance of
SAIs as the guardians of public funds. The development of democratic principles like accountability and
integrity are forming an integral part of the objectives of the European Union. The representative of the
EU Delegations therefore welcomed the initiative of this conference and expressed her best wishes for a
successful event.
Summary of the welcome address by SIGMA
SIGMA, a joint initiative of the OECD and the EU, principally financed by the EU, explained its experience
of more than 20 years in working with SAIs. In the ENI South region SIGMA has so far worked mainly with
the Audit Bureau of Jordan and the Court of Accounts of Algeria. The principle approach of SIGMA is an
exchange of experience between peers. This approach is taken into account in all working instruments
SIGMA undertakes, and it is also the approach of this first conference for the SAIs of the ENI South
region. The peers who have been invited from EU Member states and EU institutions have all played an
active part in changes and major reforms of their respective SAIs. They report on different aspects of the
new ISSAIs 12, namely:
• Strengthening accountability, transparency and integrity of government and public sector entities
• Demonstrating ongoing relevance to citizens, Parliament and other stakeholders
• Being a model organisation through leading by example.
The purpose of the presentations was not only to exchange experiences but also to trigger questions and
discussions which ultimately lead to developing recommendations during this conference for the SAIs of
the ENI South region for concrete activities that would help strengthen the impact of SAIs and to better
communicate with citizens.
II. Summary of presentations
2.1 Profiles of the SAIs of Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia and Palestine
All participating SAIs had prepared a “profile” that summarised the main achievements of their reforms
and the main challenges that they still face in order to “make a difference to the lives of citizens”. In a
Tour de table, the SAIs presented those achievements and challenges. These presentations formed the
basis for the working group discussions.

3. 3
2.2 SIGMA expert Netherlands: ISSAI 12 and its practical application
The SIGMA expert set out the international context for the subject of the conference: The Value and
Benefits of Supreme Audit Institutions – Making a difference to the lives of citizens. During the INCOSAI
2013 in Beijing, ISSAI 12 was adopted. It is based on the existing INTOSAI body of knowledge but
considers all its components from the perspective of adding value in order to make a difference to the
lives of citizens. ISSAI 12 sets out three objectives of SAIs:
• Strengthening the accountability, transparency and integrity of governments and public sector
entities
• Demonstrating ongoing relevance to citizens, Parliaments and other stakeholders
• Being a model organisation through leading by example.
Twelve Principles underlie those objectives. ISSAI 12 is accompanied by guidelines on communicating
and promoting the value and the benefits and a performance measurement framework (still in course of
development).
2.3 SIGMA expert Latvia: A successful transformation process - the Latvian experience
The SIGMA expert explained the way in which the two main reform stages of the Latvian Supreme audit
Office (SAO) were organised:
1. transition from “inspection” to “audit” type of approach (2002 – 2010) ; and
2. further improvements and innovative implementation of ISSAI 12 (2010 – now).
The expert explained the strengths of the “audit” type of approach compared to “inspection” type of
approach in terms of efficiency and impact of audits. For the first reform phase, the SAO adopted a
strategic development plan which formed the basis for annual plans, including the annual audit plan and
a plan for support and development activities.
Another corner stone for the implementation of reforms was the development of a quality management
system for audit process quality control and quality improvement measures. The first reform phase
resulted in the establishment of a modern Supreme Audit Institution, operating in accordance with the
ISA and INTOSAI.
The second reform phase was implemented to gain “competitive advantage” by considerably raising
efficiency and impact of the SAO on the lives of citizens. The strategic choices of the SAO for this
particular development phase include (1) increasing the share of perfomance audits; (2) enhancing
audits in municipalities (assessed as high risk area); (3) increasing the number of ad-hoc audits (quick
reaction on developments in national economy); and (4) focusing on financial impact (1:5 concept: every
euro invested in the SAO ensures 5 euros income/savings in national/municipal budgets).
2.4 SIGMA expert France: the implications of the budget reform on the French Court of
Auditors
In 2001 a new organic budget law was adopted on the initiative of the Parliament. The law forms the
legal basis for a major reform with the objective to promote more efficient and more democratic
management of public funds. The law led to a new way of presenting the budget (along public policies,
missions and programmes), gave more flexibility but also more responsibility to managers and
introduced accrual based accounting.

4. 4
The budget reform had an impact on the Court of Auditors at the administrative level as it reinforced its
financial independence; on the institutional level as it confirmed its independence with regard to both
the executive and the legislative; and on the functional level as it provided the Court with a more active,
more diversified role and assured better possibilities to add value through its audit work. However, huge
efforts were necessary by the Court for clarifying and rationalising procedures, adapting working
methods, internal organisation and human resources.
Since the revision of the Constitution in 2008, the publication of reports to inform citizens is a
constitutional requirement. The Court has therefore professionalised its communication service and is
actively present in the media, it has developed its internet profile, organises open doors days and has
changed the format and language of its reports.
2.5 SIGMA expert Sweden: guaranteeing independence and adapting the organisation – the
experience of Sweden
Sweden had until 2003 two audit offices: a small one worked for Parliament and a larger one - the SAI -
worked for the Government/Ministry of Finance. In the 1990´s a public administration reform took place,
focussing on results. At the same time there was demand to attach the SAI to Parliament. After a political
consensus was reached, both audit offices closed down and a new SAI was established in accordance
with the constitutional requirements for its independence. In order to strengthen independence and
objectivity it was headed by three equally powerful Auditor Generals.
The SAI worked especially on getting unrestricted access to information, mechanisms for following up on
audit findings and recommendations as well as its financial, managerial and administrative autonomy
and the appropriate human, material and financial resources.
The Swedish experience is that independence is not only about the mandate of the SAI. Equally
important is that the SAI is seen as independent by all stakeholders. It takes considerable time and effort
to achieve this. Independence should be a mind-set guiding all daily activities of the SAI. It demands a lot
of listening, information, discussions and other ways of relating to all stakeholders and the general public
in the process of forming the views of the SAI. It is equally important that the SAI itself is completely
transparent. Continuous feed-back, training and learning, based on also eventual mistakes, seem to be
key tools for success.
2.6 SIGMA expert ECA: informing citizens about policy results
The European Court of Auditors (ECA) conducts its audits in all Member States (MS), on the premises of
national or regional governments, municipalities or of any other corporation, public or private, as long as
it manages or benefits from European funds. The ECA conducts a review of management systems.
Therefore, the Court is able not only to identify weaknesses in the functioning of management systems
and, on this basis, make recommendations, but also to identify best practices, which ECA also
disseminates. The publication of both and the systematic monitoring of their implementation is part of
this debate and leads to improvements in the management of public funds.
All these reports are used by the European Parliament in the context of the discharge procedure, to put
pressure on the Commission to improve the management of the European budget by following the
recommendations formulated by the Court and shared by the Parliament. The Special Reports are not
only presented to the Committee on Budgetary Control of the European Parliament, but also to the
relevant specialized parliamentary committee.

5. 5
If the quality of the Court's work is widely recognized, it is not resting on its laurels. Thus it:
• is undertaking a reform of its annual report in order to complete its reliability Statement with
information on performance;
• has multiplied the type of Special Reports by the production of landscape reports (landscape
review) and "Quick Reports";
• has initiated a reorganization of its way of working on the basis of the audit tasks to be carried out.
III. Summary of results of the discussion groups
3.1 Discussion about existing challenges
3.1.1 Concerning the area of independence and legal framework:
While the independence of SAIs is generally defined in the legal framework in practice it is very different
from one country to another. Some SAIs have too strong links with the prime minister's office for
example, and auditors are appointed by the government. Public officials and magistrates often enjoy
more social protection than auditors. Not all SAIs have the right to publish audit reports and annual
reports themselves. Not all SAIs enjoy the necessary administrative and financial independence.
While access to information is also legally regulated for the SAIs, in fact there are areas that cannot be
controlled, like security services.
Some SAIs currently try to improve the situation through a revision of their legal basis.
3.1.2 Concerning the audit standards and audit process:
While all SAIs exercise all types of audits, there is however a difference of level of development between
the countries; terminology also differs and makes comparison difficult.
Multi-annual programming of audits is a challenge for many of the SAIs. SAIs also have to deal with the
development of IT in auditees and the application of new accounting standards. They have to develop
data basis and increasingly need external expertise, for example in accounting. SAIs recognise the need
to draft and adopt audit guides and procedural manuals; to train staff in relation to international audit
standards; to develop an audit methodology and to standardise the audit approach throughout the SAI.
While SAIs try to adapt their audit methodologies and manuals to ISSAIs this remains a challenge and can
be done only gradually as it also requires a lot of training.
3.1.3 Concerning reporting, communication and impact:
All SAIs make efforts with regard to publication of reports. So far, only the Tunisian SAI has the full legal
right to publish its audit reports and annual reports and has been doing this for some years now. For
most countries the right to publish audit reports would need a revision of the legal basis and this takes
time as the SAIs can only promote it but not decide it themselves. When it comes to timely reporting, the
SAIs generally manage to respect legal deadlines. However, internally set deadlines are more challenging.
Annual reports are done in time but in some countries they are done for the year N-2, which is
considered not being timely anymore and SAIs try to change it. Readability of reports is less a problem
for the audited entities then for non-experts, like members of Parliaments. The “translation“ of the
technical language into a more universally understandable language forms a challenge. SAIs also work on
developing communication policies.

6. 6
3.1.4 Concerning organisation, management and professional development:
While the organisation of SAIs seems to be adapted to the circumstances of each country and only
sometimes is revised related to details in order to optimise it, training and education needs to be further
developed, as there is a lack of well-trained auditors. Most SAIs have a code of ethics, and consider
commitment to ethical behaviour essential.
3.2 Discussion about ways to improve the situation
3.2.1 Concerning the area of independence and legal framework:
The working groups agreed that there is a need to convince governments that SAIs should have the right
to publish audit and other reports. It is also important to ensure that the SAI and its auditors are free
from influence of any other party. In order to raise the awareness of the importance of an independent
SAI, it is necessary for all SAIs to develop better communication with citizens and taxpayers.
3.2.2 Concerning the audit standards and audit process:
The working groups recommend that SAIs should give more importance to training by allocating
sufficient resources for training and making certain trainings mandatory for audit staff.
SAIs should also put into place a system of programming audits better and develop audit methodologies.
Peer reviews, also peer reviews between the SAIs of the region, would help to measure performance of
individual SAIs and learn from each other. In this way the SAIs of the region could also help each other.
This might be a topic for a next conference.
3.2.3 Concerning reporting, communication and impact:
The working groups recommend that concerning reports, it is important that SAIs respect the reporting
deadlines. SAIs should also consider drafting and publishing specific reports that are in the specific
interest of taxpayers.
All reports should be published swiftly after their finalisation on the website of the SAI.
All reports should be written in a simplified language that makes them more readable and
understandable for citizens and members of Parliament who are not public finance experts.
All SAIs should follow up on reports and monitor the implementation of recommendations.
3.2.4 Concerning organisation, management and professional development:
The working groups recommend that SAIs should follow ISSAI 40 concerning the need to establish a
well-functioning system for audit quality control and assurance.
International relations, co-operation and co-ordination with other SAIs is important for the development
of each SAI.
Evaluation of own performance should be a priority for each SAI. SAIs could use the performance
measurement framework for this purpose. For assessment of integrity the self-assessment tool
developed by the Netherlands SAI can be used.

7. 7
IV. Summary of the evaluation sheets
There were 55 participants at the regional conference and out of those who completed the evaluation
sheets, 45% were 'satisfied' and 55% were 'very satisfied' with the event. The two most important
benefits of the workshop were the 'benchmarking practices from different countries' (38 %) and the
'discussions' (25%). Some 70% considered that they will apply what they learned at the workshop in their
professional work and 40% felt that it had been of the right length (while 54% felt it was too short). The
'usefulness' of the various sessions were seen as either 'useful' or 'very useful' by most participants.
Overall, this represents a very successful outcome for the content of the conference and the
presentations provided.
V. Conclusions
There was a common agreement of all participants that regional conferences and other regional
activities would help to further exchange experiences on good practices and approaches that work well
in the countries of the region. With a regional approach the SAIs can capitalise the fact that they can all
communicate with each other in one language.
Considering the presentations and discussions of the conference the following aspects would deserve
further attention and consideration in future regional activities:
• In many respects independence is a precondition for a well-functioning SAI and all participating
countries face challenges. Constitutional arrangements differ, but some good practices may inspire
others. The main points of concern are:
- access rights;
- security of tenure;
- administrative autonomy;
- reporting in format and manner, decided by the SAI.
The concept of independence needs reflection and adaptation, as well as continuous revision.
• There are challenges in terms of application of international audit standards. SAIs must consider
and decide about the need to adapt the standards to national context. In this context, important
issues are:
- practical requirements of the three main types of audits on the basis of INTOSAI standards;
- quality control and quality assurance arrangements;
- multi-annual programming of audits.
• The accountability system as a whole shows structural weaknesses in many countries. The role and
function of an SAI in accordance with international standards are not always well understood.
Important activities of SAIs are:
- Communication by the SAI to explain its role and function to citizens and other stakeholders;
- user-friendly reporting that ensures understanding by non-experts;
- follow-up procedures to increase impact of audit reports.
• All SAIS are working hard to improve their performance. Currently in the focus are:
- professional development and training;

8. 8
- codes of ethics.
Specific attention should also be given to fraud and corruption. The questions here are which role for
SAIs and how to arrange for that?

9. 9
REGIONAL CONFERENCE FOR SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS
OF EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD SOUTH COUNTRIES
AGENDA
“MAKING A DIFFERENCE TO THE LIVES OF CITIZENS”
Algiers, 16-17 December 2014
2 Rue André Pascal
75775 Paris Cedex 16
France
mailto:sigmaweb@oecd.org
Tel: +33 (0) 1 45 24 82 00
Fax: +33 (0) 1 45 24 13 05
www.sigmaweb.org
This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. It should not be reported as
representing the official views of the EU, the OECD or its member countries, or of beneficiaries participating in the
SIGMA Programme. The opinions expressed and arguments employed are those of the author(s).
This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to
the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.

10. 10
Background
During INCOSAI 2013 in Beijing a new ISSAI 12 was endorsed. It was developed by the Working Group on
Value and Benefits of Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) of INTOSAI's Knowledge Sharing Committee. To
some extent this ISSAI 12 covers all INTOSAI standards at level 1 (Founding principles - The Lima
Declaration) and level 2 (Prerequisites for the functioning of SAIs, ISSAIs 10-40) of the ISSAI framework. It is
also linked to the level 3 standards, the Fundamental auditing principles (ISSAIs 100-400). The perspective
of ISSAI 12 is different however, in the sense that all components are viewed from the angle of adding
value, of making a difference to the lives of citizens. A SAI does not exist for its own purpose, but for its
potential contribution to accountability, transparency and integrity of the public sector in a country. The
fundamental expectation is that a SAI makes such a difference to the lives of citizens, so the basic question
is: how to make this happen? This calls for an approach which translates the high level principles into
examples of their practical application.
ISSAI 12 is structured around three objectives, and each objective is based on a number of principles. Each
principle is divided in number of sub-principles. The three objectives are:
• Strengthening accountability, transparency and integrity of government and public sector entities;
• Demonstrating ongoing relevance to citizens, Parliament and other stakeholders; and
• Being a model organisation through leading by example.
ISSAI 12 may be new, but the underlying principles are of course not new. To some extent ISSAI 12 is only
the codification of principles that have been floating around and were already being applied by many SAIs.
So any experience from SAIs with the application of ideas and principles behind what is now ISSAI 12 can be
relevant for the audience.
Objective
This conference brings together the SAIs of six countries of the European Neighbourhood south region
(Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, and Tunisia) and Palestine†
as observer. It provides an
opportunity to share recent experiences of the SAIs concerning their efforts to make a difference to the
lives of citizens.
The main objectives of the conference are to present the current international standards, principles and
good European practice with regard to ensuring and demonstrating the relevance of SAIs as well as to
identify regional and national challenges and opportunities in the development of the external audit
systems.
This event may also stimulate the development of more regular consultation between SAIs in the region,
either bilaterally or multilaterally, in order to seek information, advice, and models that may inspire and
promote their own national reform initiatives.
Format
The conference will be interactive and based on case presentations, interspersed with group discussions.
Experts from EU Member States as well as representatives of ECA will inform about EU policies and provide
examples of good practice. Participants will be asked to present recent developments and share experience
from their countries and from international initiatives. The meeting will also provide all participants with
the opportunity to meet informally and compare national experiences and discuss specific issues among
peers, and to establish a network for more regular exchanges.
†
This designation shall not be construed as recognition of a State of Palestine and is without prejudice to the individual
positions of the Member States on this issue.

11. 11
MONDAY 15 DECEMBER - 19:30
Participants are invited to a cocktail which will be organised and hosted
by the Algerian Court of Accounts at the Hilton Hotel
TUESDAY 16 DECEMBER 2014
CO-CHAIRED BY
THE COURT OF ACCOUNT OF ALGERIA AND SIGMA
08:30 – 9:00 WELCOME COFFEE
09:00 - 09:25 OPENING
• Mr. Marek Skolil, Ambassador/Head of Delegation of the European Union in Algeria
• Mr. Abdelkader Benmarouf, President of the Court of Accounts of Algeria
• Ms. Bianca Brétéché, Senior Advisor, Regional Coordinator ENI South, SIGMA
09:25 – 09:40 ISSAI 12 AND ITS PRACTICAL APPLICATION:
INTRODUCTION TO ISSAI 12, VALUE AND BENEFITS OF SAIS
Mr. Jan Pieter Lingen, former Head of cabinet of the Dutch member, European Court of
Auditors
ISSAI 12 is a very wide standard, setting out fundamental objectives, principles and
conditions for SAIs striving to make a difference to the lives of citizens. The objective of the
overview presentation is to give the perspective on how ISSAI 12 has been built in close
relation to other relevant ISSAIs of levels 1, 2 and 3 of the ISSAI framework.
09:40 - 10:55 MAKING A DIFFERENCE TO THE LIVES OF CITIZENS -
MAIN CHALLENGES FOR PARTICIPATING SAIS
Tour de table
The objective of this tour de table is to inform the participants about the current situation of
each of the SAIs with regard to the four topics derived from ISSAI 12: (1) independence and
legal framework, (2) audit standards and audit process, (3) reporting, communication and
impact, and (4) organisation, management and professional development. Each
participating SAI is invited to present, in a maximum of 10 minutes, the main successes that
it has achieved and the main challenges that it still faces related to making a difference to
the lives of the citizens of its country.

12. 12
10:55 - 11:25 Coffee break
11:25 – 11:55 MAKING A DIFFERENCE TO THE LIVES OF CITIZENS:
A SUCCESSFUL TRANSFORMATION PROCESS- THE LATVIAN EXPERIENCE
Ms. Marita Salgrāve, Member of the Council of the State Audit Office of the Republic of
Latvia
The objective of this country presentation is to share experience about the way the Latvian
SAO has changed, modernised and developed over time. It explains the reasons for starting
the transition process, the main areas that were tackled over time and their sequencing.
11:55 – 12:10 QUESTIONS/ANSWERS
12:10 – 12:40 MAKING A DIFFERENCE TO THE LIVES OF CITIZENS:
IMPLICATIONS OF A BUDGET REFORM – THE FRENCH EXPERIENCE
Mr. François-Roger Cazala, Senior Magistrate, Court of Accounts of France
The objective of this presentation is to explain the changes that took place in the French
Court of Accounts with regard to the budget reform in France. These include changes in the
reporting, active communication and stakeholder management in order to retain and
increase impact.
12:40 – 13:00 QUESTIONS/ANSWERS
13:00 – 14:30 Lunch
14:30 – 15:30 CHALLENGES IN APPLYING ISSAI 12 IN PARTICIPATING SAIS:
DISCUSSIONS IN WORKING GROUPS
These sessions follow up on the round table presentations in the morning and attempt to
analyse challenges in applying ISSAI 12, for which the expert presentations have provided
some food for thought.
Topics to be dealt with during the Group discussions are:
Group 1 – Independence and legal framework: which main shortcomings exist (if any) in the
legal framework for your SAI in respect of independence and mandate? Are there
possibilities to remedy these shortcomings, which experiences exist in this regard?
Group 2 – Audit standards and audit process: which experiences, challenges, and
opportunities. Are there hindrances to apply the fundamental auditing standards for
financial, compliance and performance audit? If so, how could these be overcome?
Group 3 – Reporting, communication and impact: to what extent do the audit reports your
SAI submits lead to improvements in the management of public funds? What needs to be
done to increase their impact? Are citizens aware that your SAI contributes to better public
financial management? How can it be made more visible?
Group 4 – Organisation, management and professional development: credibility is key for a
SAI; elements that ensure credibility are transparency and accountability, good governance

13. 13
including independent performance review, ethical integrity and professional competence.
What is the experience in your SAI in terms of credibility, what options exist for
improvements? Are resources a constraint? If so, can this be tackled?
15:30 – 16:00 Coffee break will be included in the working group sessions
16:00 – 16:45 CHALLENGES IN APPLYING ISSAI 12:
REPORTING BACK FROM THE GROUPS TO THE CONFERENCE
Rapporteurs of the working groups
16:45 Closure of the day
20:00 Dinner hosted by the Algerian Court of Accounts for all the participants
El Aurassi Hotel

14. 14
WEDNESDAY 17 DECEMBER 2014
CO-CHAIRED BY
THE COURT OF ACCOUNT OF ALGERIA AND SIGMA
09:00 - 09:15 OPENING AND SUMMARY OF DAY 1
• Ms. Bianca Brétéché, SIGMA
09:15 – 09:45 MAKING A DIFFERENCE TO THE LIVES OF CITIZENS:
GUARANTEEING INDEPENDENCE AND ADAPTING THE ORGANISATION – THE EXPERIENCE
OF SWEDEN
Mr. Kjell Larsson, former Auditor General of the National Audit Office of Sweden
The objective of the presentation on this country experience is to explain what the Swedish
SAI has done at specific moments in its history to safeguard its independence and how this
was instrumental in securing the authority it needs to have.
09:45 – 10:00 QUESTIONS/ANSWERS
10:00 – 10:30 Coffee break
10:30 - 11:00 MAKING A DIFFERENCE TO THE LIVES OF CITIZENS:
INFORMING CITIZENS ABOUT POLICY RESULTS, THE EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE
Mr. François Osete, Head of Cabinet of the Cypriot member, European Court of Auditors
The objective of this presentation is to show how in recent years, the ECA has given greater
priority to auditing the results of implementing EU policies and providing advice on how
performance can be improved.
11:00 – 11:15 QUESTIONS/ANSWERS
11:15 – 11:45 MAKING A DIFFERENCE TO THE LIVES OF CITIZENS:
INFORMING CITIZENS ABOUT POLICY RESULTS, THE EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE
Ms. Marita Salgrāve, Mr. Kjell Larsson, Mr. François Osete, Mr. Mohamed Salim
Benammar , Mr. Jan Pieter Lingen, moderated by SIGMA
The experts from different SAIs of EU Member States, ECA and the Court of Auditors of
Algeria, will discuss tools and instruments available to SAIs to measure their performance in
different areas such as peer reviews, INTOSaint, PMF, but also lessons learned in their own
SAIs.
The overall objective of the discussion is to provide some input for potential activities in the
future, both at the level of individual SAIs and at the international level.

15. 15
11:45 – 12:00 QUESTIONS/ANSWERS
12:00 – 13:30 Lunch
13:30 – 14:30 CHALLENGES IN APPLYING ISSAI 12 IN PARTICIPATING SAIS:
DISCUSSION IN WORKING GROUPS
These sessions follow up on the round table presentations in the morning of Day 1, the
discussion in working groups on Day 1 and the expert presentations. The working groups
make an attempt to come up with options on how to address the identified challenges,
leading to recommendations to be reported to the conference. The division of topics over
the four groups remains the same.
14:30 – 15:00 Coffee break to be included in the working group session
15:00 – 16:45 CHALLENGES IN APPLYING ISSAI 12:
REPORTING BACK FROM THE GROUPS TO THE CONFERENCE
Rapporteurs of the working groups
16:45 – 17:00 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS AND FOLLOW-UP
SIGMA experts
17:00 CLOSURE OF THE CONFERENCE
Court of Auditors of Algeria