Last week, we discussed Financial Papers 1 and 2 of 2016 which the National Assembly recently approved before going into its customary two months’ recess. The first paper dealt with the replenishment of the Contingencies Fund based on advances granted. We considered that these advances did not satisfy the criteria for access to this emergency fund since the related expenditure was neither urgent, unavoidable and unforeseen nor was the public interest in any jeopardy. In addition, Parliament was neither prorogued nor dissolved, and a sitting could have easily been called to approve of a Supplementary Estimate prior to incurring the related expenditure. We concluded that there has been a continued abuse in the use of the Contingencies Fund, an observation that I had made year after year during my tenure as Auditor General. I also recall making a presentation to parliamentarians in 2012 at which I outlined the constitutional and legislative requirements regarding the use of the Contingencies Fund. Despite this, the abuse
