House calls on gov’t to report on NICIL sales

The parliamentary opposition last night used their majority to pass a motion calling for the government to present a report on the sale of national assets by the holding company National Industrial and Commercial Investments Limited (NICIL).

The mover of the motion was APNU MP and Shadow Finance Minister Carl Greenidge, whose motion for the administration to comply with the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act (FMAA) with regard to agencies authorised to have extra budgetary funds, was also passed by the combined opposition using their one-seat majority.

Speaking on the NICIL motion, Greenidge said that the role of the company was changed over the last 20 years from its original mandate. He said that NICIL was originally envisaged as a holding company for government’s shares in divested companies. That role has now significantly evolved to the agency disposing of state assets and not putting the monies into the Consolidated Fund, he charged. “In 1992, NICIL’s only function was to manage shares… NICIL [prior to 1992] was never a manager of assets,” he explained.

He also rejected statements from members of the government benches that the functions of NICIL are the same as they were at conception. “NICIL has become an entity that supervises revenue generating entities,” he said, adding that those revenues escape the scrutiny of the National Assembly. “Ministers could not wake up one morning and instruct NICIL to [buy things],” he said.
According to Greenidge, if the NICIL funds are included in the Consolidated Fund then it would defeat the argument that the government has no money to pay for electricity subsidies and other spending cut from the national budget. He noted that the proposals in this regard are consistent with that was placed before the government during the tripartite talks with APNU and AFC.
Prime Minister Sam Hinds said that the government side was disappointed by Greenidge’s comments and sought to lodge a formal complaint to the Speaker.

The consideration of the motion saw Speaker of the National Assembly Raphael Trotman decrying what he referred to as the degeneration of the debate, which saw him repeatedly call for order in the House. He eventually suspended the sitting until the members were “ready for a serious debate.”

Resuming about 25 minutes later, he said, “We have degenerated to a state that is unbecoming of this House.” After a division was called, the opposition used its one-seat majority to approve the motion.

‘Obligation’

Meanwhile, dealing with government’s obligations under the FMAA, Greenidge said the Act and the Constitution require that the monies collected on behalf of the state must be handed over to the consolidated fund. He noted that the aim of the motion was “to see that the executive adheres to the law.”

The motion asked that the National Assembly require the Minister of Finance to lay before it a report on all the extra-budgetary agencies, including the Lottery Company and the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission, all the outstanding reports and quarterly audited accounts as required by the law. It also asked that the relevant minister/s ensure that all agencies authorised to have extra-budgetary funds under the Act and with outstanding reports as at 14 February, 2012, be immediately required to pay into the Consolidated Fund all balances held in their accounts and a statement of such payments be submitted to the National Assembly on or before 30 June, 2012.

“There is a lack of uniformity in the treatment of funds [of extra budgetary agencies],” Greenidge said during the debate, while adding that some of it is not properly accounted for and that the government has been ignoring the recommendations of the Auditor General in this regard. Greenidge pointed out that between 1996 and 2006, the Guyana Lottery Company generated $2.9 billion and that this money would not have been entered into the Consolidated Fund.

But Junior Finance Minister Juan Edghill said that the Consolidated Fund is not the sum of public funds; instead, it is only a subset. He also pointed out that Greenidge’s motion was seeking to amend an Act, which it could not do.

“There is nothing illegal in having public monies outside of the Consolidated Fund,” he said, adding that extra budgetary agencies function within a particular framework. He said too that they are not outside of the scope of examination by the Auditor General.

Edghill warned that the passage of the motion would cause an operational nightmare, since affected agencies would have to wait on the passage of an appropriation bill before they could be allowed to spend. “The motion, if carried, would collapse the governance structure of those agencies,” he said.

AFC MP Khemraj Ramjattan, however, said the administration is breaching the Constitution and the FMAA and he emphasised that the legislature is paramount when it came to the public purse. But former government minister Manzoor Nadir said that there is not a cent spent by the government that is not done by a statute of Parliament.

Lotto funds

Attorney General Anil Nandlall said that the motion, while predicated on a commendable philosophy, violated the Constitution and several sections of the FMAA. He said that similar agencies are a common feature throughout the Caribbean and he advised the opposition to exercise care in using its majority to vote, saying that there was no need for the motion.

Addressing the Lottery Company funds, Nandlall said that he has examined the legal opinion given by his predecessor Charles Ramson “and I concur with it.” He said that if the Auditor General needs another opinion then he is free to seek such an opinion or go to the courts to seek guidance. “That legal opinion guides us and we are satisfied [as] to the accuracy and the interpretation of the law in the opinion,” he said.

Ramson, as quoted in the 2009 Auditor General’s report, said, “There is therefore no legal obligation to transfer moneys [from the Lottery Fund] into the Consolidated Fund. This fund is however, subject to an audit by the Auditor General under the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act 2003.”

At the end of the debate, the motion was carried by the opposition using its majority after there was a call for a division.

Debate on another Greenidge motion, on the Former Presidents’ Pensions and Benefits, was deferred again yesterday, due to time constraints.