The Tribune

By KHRISNA VIRGIL

Deputy Chief Reporter

kvirgil@tribunemedia.net

LABOUR Minister Shane Gibson yesterday rejected the Public Accounts Committee’s report on the Urban Renewal Small Homes Repair project and accused the PAC of “churlish, politically driven, and obtuse bias,” which led it to dismiss credible evidence during its probe.

In a 22-page minority report, which pointed out “glaring errors” with the PAC report, Mr Gibson contended that the PAC was in flagrant breach of the rules of parliamentary customs and procedure with the launch of its investigation.

Mr Gibson presented and tabled the minority report in the House of Assembly yesterday.

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

The auditor general’s 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.

Mr Gibson said: “The PAC was constitutionally, and in parliamentary customs and procedure, in flagrant breach of the rules and the law in its initial purported launch of the investigation into the Urban Renewal Commission.

“The PAC did not take into account at all any of the evidence of the Independent Report on The Small Homes Repair Programme laid on the table of the Parliament which contradicted the report of the auditor general and concluded that the SHR initiative was overwhelmingly successful.

“The PAC made a fundamental error and glaring omission by its failure to call the member of Parliament for Bamboo Town (Renward Wells), who exercised full authority on behalf of the deputy prime minister and the Cabinet.”

He continued: “The leaking of the auditor general report, which the PAC chairman claimed was prepared by the auditor general by his direction, was an egregious breach of the Rules of Parliamentary Procedures and caused the auditor general to be sued in the Supreme Court by an aggrieved contractor who rightly claimed that the audit report was wrong and defamatory of him and all material particulars.

“At no time and at no place in the Majority Report was there reference to the noble transformative, compassionate, and great works of the Urban Renewal Commission. This is despite the fact that the PAC did not confine itself to the Small Homes Repair Programme, but opined on many other aspects of the functioning of the Urban Renewal Commission.

“As a consequence of the churlish, politically driven, and obtuse bias of the PAC, Urban Renewal programmes, which were mentioned in evidence before it, were ignored and dismissed.”

He further insisted that there were guidelines in place for the awarding of SHR contracts.

“As per government’s policy, members of Parliament submit priority lists with the names of homeowners in their respective constituencies and with recommended contractors to effect house repairs through the parliamentary secretary for the deputy prime minister for approval/ratification.

“The deputy prime minister consults with the Urban Renewal Commission co-chairs. The deputy prime minister approves house repairs exceeding $10,000 and the co-chairs are authorised to approve house repairs with a value up to $10,000,” his report said.

“Social workers attached to Urban Renewal are asked to conduct social history on homeowners who are recommended for house repairs.”

“The deputy prime minister and minister of works and urban development has the authority and the discretion in the number of contracts awarded. It was determined that it was desirable, however, that as many small contractors as possible be afforded work in the Small Home Repairs Programme.

“It has been proven that no abandoned houses were repaired on Royal Palm Street - another glaring error cited in the report. The homeowner asked for assistance with roof repairs only and undertook to complete other needed repairs to his home.”

Regarding Co-Chairs Algernon Allen and Cynthia “Mother” Pratt, Mr Gibson said they were both well aware of their duties.

“As Urban Renewal Commission Co-Chair, Mr Allen is fully cognisant of his role. He promotes and markets the Urban Renewal 2.0 programme and superintends all activities of the URC, including the SHR. It is well attested that Co-Chair Allen expends more than twice his government stipend in promotion of the Urban Renewal programmes and has provided endless financial support through necessary gifts to cover various operational exercises within Urban Renewal,” the minority report noted.

“Furthermore, Mr Allen’s role as an Urban Renewal Commission co-chair is far from ceremonial as he promotes and markets the Urban Renewal 2.0 programme and superintends the Urban Renewal projects and programmes in New Providence.”

“Notwithstanding that he is not an executive co-chair as, almost on a daily basis, he is in contact with Co-Chair Pratt, the permanent secretary, deputy director, and other members of staff discussing issues related to Urban Renewal and approving funds for Urban Renewal events and activities. In fact, Co-Chair Allen is so intimately involved in Urban Renewal that his staff at his private law office serves willingly as an extension to the Urban Renewal Commission.

“The picture painted of Mr Algernon Allen by the Public Accounts Committee’s Majority Report is insulting as it questions whether he is a functioning co-chair and is entitled to a stipend of $52,000 per annum. It is well noted that Mr Allen gives to various charities across the length and breadth of the nation,” Mr Gibson’s report noted.