By KHRISNA VIRGIL

Deputy Chief Reporter

kvirgil@tribunemedia.net

AFTER numerous delays, the Public Accounts Committee tabled its report into the Urban Renewal Commission, finding it “severely lacking in accountability” coupled with “minimal fiscal safeguards” and led by co-chairs who are extremely “naïve” and unclear of their roles to properly administer the initiative.

As a result, PAC Chairman Hubert Chipman told the House of Assembly it was quite clear that the public did not get value for money and that opportunities for “dishonest dealing, fraud and profiteering abounded.”

The report suggested that one troubling instance where dishonest dealing could have occurred was in the allocation of a $1m fund that was to be used for an urban agriculture programme, but was “redirected” to other areas. The initial programme was said to have “died on the vine” and the staff hired for this purpose were instead assigned to the Small Homes Repair (SHR) programme.

It was further found that there was “gross negligence” in the operation of the URC private bank account.

In its first report of the 2012 session of Parliament, the PAC found that although Co-Chairs Algernon Allen and Cynthia “Mother” Pratt were each paid $52,000 per annum for part-time work and provided with separate vehicles, gas allowance, cell phones and offices, their purview was strictly limited to New Providence where it appeared they had no authority to enforce particular guidelines related to the granting of contracts for the SHR programme among other things.

“He (Mr Allen) and his co-chair have no say nor authority and dare not trespass in that part (other islands) of the Bahamas,” the report said as it drew attention to Deputy Director Michelle Reckley’s role in Urban Renewal. She heads the programme in Grand Bahama and the Family Islands, the report noted.

“Mr Allen confirmed that his authority as co-chair is limited to New Providence. He testified that this was not a satisfactory arrangement from his prospective and that in his view, the commission should have responsibility for the entire Bahamas,” the report continued.

“Mr Allen confirmed that the practice was to limit the number of repair contracts under the SHR scheme to two projects per contractor to ensure a fair distribution of work among eligible contractors. He indicated that on several occasions the allocation policy was overridden by direct intervention on the part of the Minister of Works and Urban Development (Philip Davis) specifically and other efficiency considerations.

“The PAC found Mr Allen to be by and large forthcoming, however it was obvious that his role is largely ceremonial and public relations orientated rather than acting as a functioning chairman giving the PAC reason to question the value for money received from the co-chairs.”

Regarding Mrs Pratt’s role in Urban Renewal, the PAC said while she should be commended for her decades long commitment to alleviating the plight of the poor, the former deputy prime minister was found to pay little attention to details.

“The PAC found Mrs Pratt to have been naïve in the extreme when it came to her role with URC. It would seem from her testimony that she paid little attention to details, administrative systems, accounting practices, questions of transparency or, any other questions of protocol.”

In April 2015, a copy of Auditor General Terrance Bastian’s critical report into Urban Renewal’s Small Homes Repair programme was leaked to the press and sparked a debate over the management of Urban Renewal. The PAC has used the report for its investigation.

Mr Bastian highlighted a litany of concerns and weaknesses related to the Small Home Repairs project’s management and expenditure.

The audit revealed, for instance, that 11 contractors were paid more than $170,000 for small home repairs that were “not completed or done”.

Small Homes Repair Programme

The PAC’s report revealed concerns that were similar to those outlined in the auditor general’s controversial report.

These included no regard for the practice of limiting the award of repair projects to two per contractor.

The PAC, through interviews, also found that while the policy was to always have all documents required on file, including the DPM’s approval for projects in excess of $10,000, there were exceptions.

The committee reviewed files and found that a complete set of documents to qualify contractors for engagement in SHR were not present. Documents omitted included insurance certificates, evidence of current business license, evidence of NIB status, scope of works documents signed by the homeowner, contractor, inspector or quantity surveyor reports.

“Mr Allen confirmed that the practice was to limit the number of repair contracts under the SHR scheme to two projects per contractor to ensure a fair distribution of work among eligible contractors. He indicated that on several occasions the allocation policy was overridden by direct intervention on the part of the minister of works and urban development specifically and other efficiency considerations,” the report noted.

“One such contractor identified was a Mr Terry Delancy, Virgo Construction, who was allocated at least nine contracts and Mr Deshawn Thompson who was allocated 11 contracts. Mr Allen indicated that it was never made clear to the URC the rationale used for departing from the allocation policy.

“Mr Allen was forced to concede that homes that were obviously derelict and unoccupied should not have been the subject of SHR contracts. For example, a home on Royal Palm Street that was plainly abandoned and had no windows somehow received a new roof under the programme.”

Procedures for securing approval for SHR in excess of $10,000 were also found to be “lax at best” but more appropriately classified as negligent, the report said.

This was proven in the testimony of URC Permanent Secretary Diana Lightbourne.

“PS Lightbourne revealed that in some instances a single home was the subject of multiple contracts that collectively amounted to more than $10,000. These contracts were allowed to proceed without the approval of the deputy prime minister despite this contravening established protocol.

“PS Lightbourne was unable to provide the PAC with adequate explanation of the control errors that allowed these multiple contracts in relation to a single home, which individually did not exceed the $10,000 threshold but collectively far exceeded it and in some cases totalled in excess of $30,000.

“Following the review of several projects in excess of $10,000, which should require individual sign off by the minister, the PAC was unable to locate evidence of a sign off by the minister. In a subsequent interview session, PS Lightbourne produced an undated document, purporting the same to be a blanket approval issued by the minister giving approval to a number of repairs. When questioned as to when that document was signed, as it did not exist prior to the last interview session, PS Lightbourne admitted that the list was signed off by the minister just three days prior to the interview.

“Questioned as to the appropriateness of blanket approvals versus the sign off of individual projects as is the indicated policy, PS Lightbourne could give no satisfactory answer.”

Frustration

The presentation of this report was delayed five times, Mr Chipman told Parliament, as he lamented the difficulty the PAC encountered to receive the necessary information and documents needed to complete its probe.

“As chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, this has to be the most frustrating experience in my professional career,” he said. “Mr Speaker, I now know how the government and its agencies work. This committee has been taken to task on social media over the last few years and I must say rightly so. This is the age where people are expecting more accountability from the government.

“Mr Speaker, during the last few years I began to ask myself, are we serious in this country? We have been challenged because we have not been able to have meetings because of a quorum, lack of information from various ministries on a timely basis, lack of resources, such as stenographers and the disruption to the committees for four months.

“Mr Speaker this report has been completed since January. Mr Speaker, we cannot continue in this vein.”

The report also noted that there was no competitive bidding for the home repair contracts and the contractors were not required to have proof of all-risk insurance.

The PAC also highlighted concerns with the Urban Renewal Foundation.

“The PAC finds this foundation programme highly irregular as funds are solicited on behalf of programmes managed and sponsored by URC. As such it is the PAC’s considered opinion that it does fall within the ambit of the Financial Administration and Audit Act and is subject to audit by the Auditor General.

“The foundation’s accounts had not been audited up to the time of the auditor general’s review. The PAC noted that the foundation’s auditor is Grant Thornton and that this firm’s Managing Partner Paul Andy Gomez is also a member of the foundation’s board. This is a clear conflict of interest in contravention of the rules on audit engagements under International Auditing Standards followed by the Bahamas Institute of Chartered Accountants of which, Mr Gomez is a member.”

The PAC’s members included Mr Chipman, FNM St Anne’s MP, Peter Turnquest, FNM East Grand Bahama MP, Richard Lightbourn, FNM Montagu MP, Shane Gibson, PLP MP for Golden Gates and Ryan Pinder, PLP Elizabeth MP.

Both government MPs refused to sign off on the PAC’s report.