Earlier this month, 7News told you about the plan which Government majority members of the Public Accounts Committee intended to implement: they decided to look into public spending done by the two political parties' government administrations from the financial periods of 2003/2004 forward for the PUP and 2008/2009 forward for the UDP.
The Opposition has made it clear that they refuse to support this agenda as the way forward, and they've called these meetings illegal since the Chair of the committee did not set the agenda.
Current Chairman Julius Espat and his fellow opposition member, Rodwell Ferguson, who makes up the PAC, did not attend today's meeting, the first in the series, which was significant for 2 reasons. Firstly, it was the first meeting in years which actually conducted the business of the committee, and it was also done in the public, where the media was allowed in, which is not the norm of this or any committee.
Once again, the Government majority elected John Saldivar as protem chair of today's meeting, and in his opening statement, Saldivar made a public request of Julius Espat, which he described as a compromise. Here's how he explained why Espat should sit as chair on the Wednesday meetings:
Hon. John Saldivar
"I wish though to include my opening statement by making a public plea to the substantive chairman of this committee the member for Cayo South to resume the chair at the earliest and allow the work of the committee to progress with equal scrutiny on what took place during the period of administration of the PUP and in the current UDP administration."
"As a compromise and since it is clear that the substantive chair will feel uncomfortable presiding over a meeting that is considering his party's administration. I proposed that he return to the chair for those meetings where the UDP record will be scrutinized and that he asks the committee to select a chair from the government side when the record of his party's administration will be considered."
"I await his response to this proposal which hopefully will be in the affirmative by the meeting on Wednesday so that he can assume the chair."
"We will now proceed with the agenda for this morning's meeting."
After the morning session concluded, we asked Saldivar about his impression of the first meeting. They invited the senators representing the social partners who sat in the meeting as observers, and Saldivar told the media that the meeting is going well:
Hon. John Saldivar
"It's been very insightful. I believe that the information gathered from the former Auditor General is already pointing us into a direction in terms of how governments' finances have been kept in the past and perhaps continue to be kept."
"We are looking to see what the deficiencies are and how we can improve the system."
Mike Rudon, reporter Channel 5
"What would be the glaring thing that's come out of this morning?"
Hon. John Saldivar
"As you saw in the wrap-up just now the former Auditor General declared quite clearly that in his opinion was not able to give an adequate opinion on the financial statements for 2003-2004 simply because most of the material statements that should have provided to him by the Accountant General were not provided."
And speaking of that issue, 7News picked up quite a few times where the Former Auditor General was unable provide an opinion on certain sections of his report because certain financial statements were missing for 2003 to 2004. This caused the Former Auditor General to be unable to look into those aspects of public spending. Here's a short excerpt of one such occasion where the Protem Chairman asked him about it:
Hon. John Saldivar
"In item E on the list of items to be provided which you have listed there in your report. As statement of losses including abandoned claims of public monies, stamps securities, stores, or other property of government written off during the financial year is required. This statement was not included in your report?"
Edmund Zuniga, Former Auditor General
"That is correct because from what I can see here that statement was not submitted by the Accountant General's office for audit."
Hon. John Saldivar
"Not submitted by the Accountant General."
"Should you then have indicated the omission of that report?"
Edmund Zuniga, Former Auditor General
"Yes, actually there is one short sentence on it at the bottom of page 55 which says this statement was not submitted for audit."
Hon. John Saldivar
"When you say '"we did not received" you are referring to the office of Accountant General?"
Edmund Zuniga, Former Auditor General
"That's correct."
Hon. John Saldivar
"Who should in turn received those from the ministries?"
Edmund Zuniga, Former Auditor General
"The Accountant General's office produces its statements and I guess they rely on whatever reports they get from the treasury itself as well as ministries and so forth."
Hon. John Saldivar
"Do you think that your report would have had more meaning if it included explanations provided to your office as to why for instance there was a 55 million dollars shortfall in revenue? Do you think that should been commented upon in your report?"
Edmund Zuniga, Former Auditor General
"I don't think so, because we - audit - has no determination of governments estimate of revenue and whether or not they collect that revenue."
"I can recall later on in one of my reports that I made a point where revenues seems to have fallen short of the budget."
The meeting continued after the lunch break.
The protem chair is only able to sit for the duration of one day, and as a result, if the duly appointed chair, Julius Espat, continues to absent himself, the members of the committee will have to elect a protem chair at the beginning of every meeting.
The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, it remains to be seen in Espat will accept Saldivar's request for compromise.
Email
Print