Imbert to report to MPs within 3 months – OPM to be audited

FINANCE Minister Colm Imbert has announced an audit into the expenditure in the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) during the nine-year tenure in office of the Prime Minister, and the five-year tenure of his immediate predecessor Kamla Persad-Bissessar.

He also promised that the detailed audit will be laid in Parliament in three months.

Imbert made this promise on October 14 before the Standing Finance Committee of the House of Representatives approved a $7,359,935,650 budgetary allocation to his ministry.

After he outlined some of the duties of departments which fell under his ministry, Imbert said, "I have today instructed the central audit division to audit the expenditure at the OPM in terms of entertainment and other expenses such as maintenance of the Diplomatic Centre and so on for the period 2010-2015 (Persad-Bissessar) and the period 2015-2024 (Dr Rowley)."

He added this report will be "laid in the Parliament so that we can see exactly what was spent during the 2010-2015 period and what has been spent by the prime minister during the 2015-2024 period.

"I undertake that within three months, I will lay that report so everybody could see – the public and everybody else."

When he concluded the budget debate in the House on October 10, Imbert said Persad-Bissessar was wrong to claim there was a $50 million allocation to the OPM in the 2024/2025 budget for the hosting of fetes.

Efforts to reach Persad-Bissessar for a response to Imbert's announcement were futile as calls to her cellphone were not answered and there was no response to WhatsApp messages sent to her.

It was Persad-Bissessar who on October 7, at a press conference, raised questions regarding a $400 million allocation to the OPM for construction. She called on Dr Rowley to explain what she said could be perceived as "double dipping" into public funds by the allocation of this $400 million.

At a PNM meeting on October 3, Rowley said the allocation was for debts owed to the Urban Development Corporation (Udecott) for several projects including the central block at Port of Spain General Hospital, which is under construction.

However, Persad-Bissessar noted that funding for Udecott projects, including the hospital's central block, had already been allocated through other ministries in the 2025 Draft Estimates of Development Programme.

Following Persad-Bissessar's calls, both the Prime Minister and Imbert, in their budget contribution and wind-up respectively, sought to highlight expenditure levels at the OPM when she was prime minister as compared to expenditure levels under Rowley.

Imbert said the expenditure at the OPM when Persad-Bissessar assumed office in 2010 was $14 million. By 2012, this figure had increased to $35 million. In 2014, it was $44 million.

Expenditure at the OPM under Dr Rowley, he said, averages $10 million annually.

"The expenditure of their (UNC) prime minister was three times that, close to $40 million. I won't go into details about $3,000 on roti and $1 million on shrimp."

Imbert said Persad-Bissessar's claim about a $400 million allocation for construction under the OPM being for electioneering was also false.

He added that Persad-Bissessar's other claims about revenue and borrowing demonstrated that after 20 years in politics, she was clueless about how a government works.

Rowley has also rejected Persad-Bissessar's claims about expenditure at the OPM since he assumed office in September 2015.

On October 14, during the Standing Finance Committee's examination of monies earmarked for the finance ministry, and responding to opposition queries on expenditure with respect to legal fees, Imbert said he and his ministry have received freedom of information (FOI) requests on a regular basis, "Sometimes every single day.

"We also get pre-action protocol letters on a regular basis, sometimes every day, week or month."

He added the ministry also receives writs, claims and "actual legal action" as well.

"We have to defend ourselves."

Most of the time, he continued, these actions are "initiated directly by persons, MPs of the UNC opposition, sometimes."

Imbert said these actions also come from "well-known UNC activists and sometimes by men of straw associated with the UNC.

"We have to hire lawyers to defend ourselves and defend the public purse.

"So that's what that bill is for."

Couva South MP Rudranath Indarsingh said law-abiding citizens have a right to seek information from government agencies using FOI requests, and claimed government is operating in a clandestine manner.

Imbert rejected this view.

"I'm afraid that the pre-action protocols and the FOI requests are not so clandestine. They are obviously coming from the UNC.

"Be that as it may, we get these things so fast and furious that sometimes we can't keep up with the bills. Because UNC activists, UNC MPs file legal action so often, we can't keep up with the bills. So yes, we owe lawyers money because you come at us so often."

Imbert promised to provide opposition MPs with as much information on this expenditure as he is able to.

Oropouche West MP Davendranath Tancoo asked if the ministry had in-house attorneys to handle claims against it.

Imbert said, "We don't play in the amateur league in the Ministry of Finance, we hire senior counsel, and because we hire senior counsel, distinguished, experienced senior counsel, we win (our legal matters).

"I don't want to go to a situation where we would put the government and the treasury at risk."

Imbert said the ministry will continue to outsource legal services to senior counsel.

Tancoo was confused as to why such attorneys should be handling FOI requests.

Imbert said, "Many of the men of straw – I haven't seen many ladies of straw, it's mostly men of straw who operate on behalf of the UNC and send us FOI requests – request things that are not permitted under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and therefore we have to seek advice on almost every occasion."

He reminded MPs the FOIA requires disclosure of documents, but added, "Quite often we get a request asking for an opinion, asking us to create documents that don't exist."

He repeated this is why the ministry must seek advice from senior counsel.

"More times than not, the person (who) is asking for documents that don't exist sues us.

"We actually have a live case right now where a particular individual asks for documents that don't exist and when we told them the documents don't exist, they gone to court."

He said he seeks senior counsel advice on these matters because he is prudent.

"Because of that, our success rate in court is very high."