The accounting officers of the Region 7 (Cuyuni/Mazaruni) council were yesterday upbraided by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of Parliament over the handling of documentation and record-keeping as they failed to provide critical answers during the interrogation of the 2017 and 2018 Auditor General’s reports.
PAC Member Gail Teixeira told the accounting officers yesterday that the provision of responses to questions on projects flagged by the Auditor General (AG) is critical.
She noted that the provision of answers is a team effort and supporting officers should be in a position to provide the accounting officers with the right response.
“This is a body appointed by the parliament and under the Constitution of Guyana, please don’t treat it with disrespect. You may not like us individually or our parties individually but we are here playing a role. Anybody who comes to this body must come prepared to participate or assist the accounting officers… This is a team effort. We are trying to resolve issues and make sure that we are financially accountable and transparent in this country. This is not a joke…”, Teixeira underscored as she responded to Regional Executive Officer (REO) Kerwin Ward.
Ward and his team, who returned before the PAC for a second time in two weeks, were unable to provide detailed and clear answers on contracts and payment for works procured by the regional administration.
Teixeira, disappointed in the short answers given to questions asked by members on both sides of the committee, said the Regional Democratic Council (RDC) must be better prepared to answer questions put by members.
She blasted officers who failed to furnish the REO with the necessary answers for the committee.
“I hope that all the members sitting here from the RDCs are taking note of these questions. They are not assisting with no documents or records. What kind of treatment is this …? Why do you walk with people here who do not intend to be a part of the meeting, REO?” the PAC member questioned before stating “I see people sitting here with their hand on their handbag with not a piece of paper, not taking notes not taking anything. If some only want to have their hands on their handbag or hand on table then leave the room.”
During the meeting it was pointed out that while it is unfair for accounting officers to be grilled for a period in which they did not function, the supporting staff should have been able to help in providing answers.
At yesterday’s hearing, the committee grilled the region on its record-keeping and payment requests by contractors.
The AG in his 2018 report flagged the region for breaches in their payment methods as the supporting documents for works on the Agatash Sea Defence did not correspond.
“It is unclear how the final payment was processed without the detailed/measured works breakdown attached. Examination of attachments to the final Payment Voucher revealed that the contractor had submitted a Request for Payment for the sum of $2.5M on 21 November 2018, only two days after signing the contract. No details of the works completed at the time to the value of $2.5M was attached to the Request for Payment. Additionally, Valuation No. 1 in the sum of $2M and Valuation No. 2 in the sum of $3.689M were also attached. None of these valuations correspond to the contractor’s Payment Request. It is unclear how these payments were actually made under the contract,” the AG reported.
The AG report had stated that the contract for the maintenance of the river defence at Agatash, Bartica was awarded in the sum of $4.782M to the second most competitive bidder. As at 31 December 2018, the full amount was paid to the contractor. The audit found that physical verification of the project revealed that the works were completed, however, it was found that the final Payment Voucher did not have a completed measured works valuation certificate attached, as such, the physical verification of this project could not determine whether or not any overpayment had occurred.
During scrutiny, it was revealed that despite the sum requested by the contractor, the region did not err in their payments by overpaying and payments were made in four installments.
While the contract was awarded at $4.782M, the contractor payment request totaled over $5M without many variations in the project.
It was revealed that despite the inaccuracy, the region did not overpay. However, poor documentation at the time of the audit prevented the auditors from having clarity on the procedure.
When asked for a breakdown and dates on when the payments were made, Ward told the committee that a payment of $1.7m was made in November, two days after the contract was awarded while the other payments were made in December. He could not provide exact dates he told the PAC. However, the AG’s Office stated that the remaining payments of $1.4m, $964,000 and $468,000 were made on December 12, 23, 2018 and January 11, 2019 respectively.
The AG’s office explained that their dates of payments were gathered from payment vouchers.
Additionally, it was revealed that while the Region’s Engineer Selwyn Charles signed off on the certification of works, he did not physically make checks on the project and relied on information related to him by junior staff.
The committee also upbraided Charles for not being able to provide answers on the payments and poor documentation of the project by the region. It was explained by Charles that there was a mix-up with records due to a typographical error where it had stated that there should have been rehabilitation on the project document rather than maintenance. This resulted in minor difficulties in locating the necessary documents.
On this observation, Teixeira said there should be a review of systems operating in the RDC and its methods in record keeping. She noted that attention must be placed on record-keeping. The committee also pointed out to the Regional Engineer that he cannot assign his job to others as he is the one answerable since his signature is affixed to certification documents.
