The Tribune

By KHRISNA VIRGIL

Tribune Staff Report

kvirgil@tribunemedia.net

HOUSE Speaker of Assembly Dr Kendal Major said he expects to make a recommendation before Parliament reconvenes today on whether Urban Renewal 2.0 co-chairs Cynthia “Mother” Pratt and Algernon Allen should be subpoenaed to appear before the Public Accounts Committee to answer questions over the initiative’s operations.

This comes following PAC Chairman Hubert Chipman’s formal request to Dr Major to compel Mrs Pratt and Mr Allen to attend the hearing.

Dr Major confirmed that he received the PAC’s request on Monday.

“I will consider the request and make a recommendation to the Public Accounts Committee,” Dr Major told The Tribune yesterday. “This will happen tomorrow (Wednesday) morning before the House meets.”

When contacted yesterday, Mr Allen was tight-lipped when asked if he had changed his mind about appearing before the committee. He said both he and Mrs Pratt were “still seeking advice on whether to appear before the PAC”.

The PAC petitioned the speaker after the co-chairs refused to appear at a scheduled hearing last Thursday. Their refusal came days after a leaked report by the auditor general on Urban Renewal and its Small Homes Repair programme revealed a litany of concerning issues about the initiative’s management and expenditure oversight.

Mrs Pratt and Mr Allen have said that the audit has not gone through proper parliamentary channels because it has not been tabled in Parliament. They have also said that the audit is incomplete.

They declined to attend last Thursday’s hearing citing short notice from the PAC and earlier commitments. They also said they would appear before the committee at an appropriate date, only if the audit was taken out of the scope of questioning.

On Sunday, Dr Major said he saw no fault in the process the PAC is taking to get answers about the scathing findings about the audit prepared by Auditor General Terrance Bastian.

The report in large part found that Urban Renewal’s internal controls are “weak,” leaving the initiative open to “abuse”.

Meanwhile, the audit into the Small Home Repairs Programme notes that payments to 11 contractors for more than $170,000 of work was not completed or done, that there was no competitive bidding for the home repair contracts and the contractors were not required to have proof of all-risk insurance.

However, Dr Major has said the co-chairs’ reasoning is based on a “misunderstanding”.

He said earlier this week: “This report does not have to be tabled. This report was requested of the auditor general for a special period and is not like the annual year end reports.”

He added: “This report is not a draft. To my understanding it’s the final report and it doesn’t have to be debated.”

On Sunday, Dr Major said a subpoena could be sent either by the PAC or through his own office, although he acknowledged that the process that decides the way subpoenas are issued is ambiguous.

He said he believes both Mrs Pratt and Mr Allen are “decent, loyal and recognise the rules,” adding that he expects them to comply with the PAC’s demands once the misunderstanding over the matter is cleared up.

He insisted that the rules of the House would govern the process by which subpoenas are issued and not his own personal judgments about the matter.