Thu | Mar 28, 2024

Bryan, Monroe Ellis wrangle over $619m spent for COVID quarantine

Published:Wednesday | April 19, 2023 | 1:48 AMEdmond Campbell/Senior Parliamentary Reporter
Dunstan Bryan, permanent secretary in the Ministry of Health and Wellness.
Dunstan Bryan, permanent secretary in the Ministry of Health and Wellness.

Several “red flags” in the spending of $619 million between June 2020 and November 2021 by the Ministry of Health & Wellness for accommodation to quarantine persons with COVID-19 or those exposed to the virus may trigger another audit by the Auditor General’s Department (AuGD).

This conclusion was arrived at after St Catherine South Eastern Member of Parliament Robert Miller questioned if any misappropriation of funds was discovered in an earlier compliance audit by the AuGD.

Responding to the query, Auditor General Pamela Monroe Ellis told members of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of Parliament on Tuesday that “there are several red flags that suggest that a different type of audit is required”.

“Based on information coming to me [on Monday], I mentioned the $619 million, which is still of concern to me. It would require a different audit, Member, before I can respond conclusively,” she said.

Monroe Ellis told the committee that she requested and received only Monday a printout of the total payments made by the health ministry.

Dunstan Bryan, permanent secretary in the Ministry of Health & Wellness, who was upset over the findings of the Compliance Audit Compendium Report on COVID-19 Expenditure, which was tabled in Parliament in January, said his ministry believes in the rule of law and good governance.

Bryan and Monroe Ellis engaged in a spirited verbal tussle over the report, which sought to determine whether there was transparency and accountability in how the ministry spent taxpayers’ money.

The audit was undertaken in May 2020 and the COVID-19 lockdown started in March 2020.

Bryan appeared before the committee on Tuesday to answer questions arising from the report. He wanted to know which provision in law the auditor general had used to indicate that his ministry was not in compliance with the law.

“ ... There is a mention on page 17 of procurement guidelines. Our position is that under Section 4 and the First Schedule, paragraph (1)(i) travel service and hotel accommodations are exempt from procurement,” said Bryan.

But Monroe Ellis signalled that she did not intend to debate the issue, noting that her focus was on the stewardship of public funds and resources.

She argued that during the heights of the pandemic, the hotels were closed, noting that what the Government did was to rent the space to host persons who were quarantined in its facilities.

The auditor general told the committee that Bryan relied on a purchase order to establish that the ministry entered into a contract with the hotels and other facilities.

However, the auditor general contended that if the purchase order is to be used as a contract, the terms of the agreement should be clearly stipulated to hold the supplier accountable and to protect the Government.

However, Bryan insisted that the ministry did not breach any regulation as indicated in the findings.

“The auditor general is not at large. Her opinions and her ruminations do not bind me. The law binds me,” he declared, adding that until the auditor general provides the legal basis on which her audit was predicated, he had no obligation in law to adhere to the findings.

The permanent secretary described as offensive the findings indicating that the process used by the ministry lacked transparency.

“ ... I reject the finding, and if it is not in law, I am not obligated to hear the ruminations of the auditor general,” he insisted.

Hitting back, Monroe Ellis said that the permanent secretary was being measured against Section 53 of the Financial Regulations, which requires accounting officers to agree on the terms and conditions of service prior to implementation.

She said while the permanent secretary insisted on using the purchase orders, they were not even completed properly and, as such, did not meet the standard of the regulations.

Monroe Ellis divulged that the payment voucher and the invoice bore the same date and that payment was made for hotel rooms not yet occupied but was stamped that “goods delivered satisfactorily”.

“The fact is, too, the permanent secretary, because he is hell-bent on holding on to this thing about purchase order, has not actually provided any evidence that he was able to satisfy himself that all the rooms were occupied,” she added.

Monroe Ellis said she was concerned that the purchase order contained “absolutely nothing that would amount to a contract. In fact, the ministry used the purchase orders as payment vouchers. That’s not how a purchase order is supposed to be utilised”.

She noted that the purchase order should set out very clearly the specifications of the goods being procured or the terms of agreement of the services being procured.

“It did not say that,” she added.

Another concern raised by the auditor general was that on many occasions the purchase order was prepared after the invoice.

Bryan told the committee that the ministry received value for money when it spent more than half a billion dollars on COVID-19-related expenses.

He said at the time of the transaction, the ministry did not know how many rooms would be utilised.

Bryan said that at one point, the ministry had to move out nearly 450 members of a call centre because they were living in households with high-risk factors and they had to move quickly.

He said the ministry agreed on a substantially reduced rate and the hotel said that in order to start up its plant, it needed an advance. He said the advance was paid.

Bryan charged that what was “egregious” about the finding of the AuGD is that it robs “the 223,000 members of the system the benefit of understanding their role and function in protecting this country against a possible disaster”.

Committee member Lothan Cousins said that the issue was not COVID-19 because everyone lived through it. However, he argued that all funds expended during the pandemic belong to Jamaican taxpayers.

Noting that he understood the “constraints and environment” under which the ministry was working, Cousins charged that the permanent secretary found a “lacuna” in the law that should be plugged by lawmakers.

Legislator Dwight Sibbiles rushed to Bryan’s defence as he sought to dismiss the Cousins’ assertion.

He also said it was the permanent secretary’s right to question which laws he purportedly breached in the auditor general’s audit report.

Sibblies said he understands the auditor general’s concerns that she was unable to review “certain things against” established standards. While thanking the ministry for its efforts during the pandemic, Sibblies said that technocrats should pay keen attention to the lessons learnt during the process.

Hope Blake, deputy financial secretary, said that the purchase order creates a contract for delivery or supply of service. However, she noted that efforts must be made to “protect the Government as much as possible, so even where there is a purchase order, we would expect that there are conditions of service and that the Government can be protected in case there is a legal matter and that is what we are mostly interested in”.

edmond.campbell@gleanerjm.com