According to the report that was recently tabled in the National Assembly by the Speaker of the House, in 2007, a total of 375 pay change directives for resignations, retirements, dismissals and transfers were forwarded late to the Central Accounting Unit of the Ministry, resulting in overpaid net salaries totaling $10.7M and deductions amounting to $4.549M.

To date, net salaries totaling $6.1M were recovered, leaving $4.6M and the deductions.

It was pointed out that a similar situation occurred in 2006 and $3.9M as well as an undetermined amount of deductions remain outstanding.

It was also highlighted that the Ministry has still not taken the necessary steps to ensure that cheque orders are carefully monitored and cleared within the stipulated time-frame through the submission of bills, receipts and other supporting documents.

For the year 2007, there were 60 cheque orders totaling $11.4M that were outstanding and this was compounded by an outstanding balance of 52 orders valued at $1.2M for the years 2004 to 2006.

The Auditor General also pointed out that the Ministry’s old main bank account, which became non-operational in May 1996, was overdrawn by $78.2M as at 31 December 2007 and the account had not been reconciled.

A losses report has been filed with Finance Secretary but the closure of the account is still pending.

The report also documented the fact that the Ministry is still to recover $4.2M that was outstanding on transactions for the years 2000 and 2001.

The report explained that an amount of $2.073M, representing 50 per cent of the cost of two one-minute television features, which was advanced to a local firm.

The cost included accommodation and five airfares to an unspecified location, together with shooting and agency costs.

The reasonableness of the charges was not ascertained, since the contractor was not required to give a breakdown of the activity costs before the matter was referred to the Central Tender Board for approval.

Following the award, the execution of the contract was put on hold since November 2000, but the contractor was not required to refund the advance.

The Ministry’s Head of Budget Agency explained that the local firm contracted to undertake the television feature in 2000 has been identified as Ross Enterprise.

“All attempts to trace this firm have been futile.”

A difference of $2.043M still remained outstanding from transactions undertaken by an expediter of the Ministry, who during his tenure of duty, made payments of various amounts to suppliers without the receipt of the goods.

The initial discrepancy amounted to $5.243M, but during the years 2002 and 2003, items to the value of $3.2M were delivered.

An examination of the Register of Contributors to the National Insurance Scheme for the Ministry’s administrative employees and teachers revealed that as at 31 December 2007, there were 1,146 instances where the NIS numbers were not recorded.

This prompted suspicions that these persons were not registered with the Scheme.

The Ministry has since undertaken a commitment to rectify the issue.

The Ministry also failed to maintain a contract register with all pertinent details, including contract number, details of award, contract sums, variations and progress payments.

“The absence of this record resulted in much difficulty being experienced during the validation of the financial and other aspects of contracts.”

The report also noted that the Ministry had not resolved the issue concerning the overpayment of $32M to a delinquent contractor for works on the construction of the male dormitory at the President’s College. The position remained the same in 2007.

The Head of Budget Agency explained that the project was managed by SIMAP and the Ministry of Education only provided a part of the project sum.

He added that the alleged overpayment was done by SIMAP as the executing agency and the Ministry played no part in the management (preparation of payments, verifying claims, provision of Clerk of Works, examination of vouchers or actual payments) of this contract.

Representatives from the Ministry, however, attended site meetings and a few extra-ordinary meetings at Head Office when the project began to experience difficulties.

The Auditor General also pointed out that the status of the completion of the lab building at New Amsterdam Technical Institute remained undetermined.

In 2004, the Tender Board awarded the works in the sum of $10.8M and during that year, progress payments amounted to $5.5M.

The project was closed in 2005 after the Chief Building Inspector terminated the contract on the grounds of substandard work, among other things. Thereafter, there were no budgets for the works.

The Head of Budget Agency explained that “communication with the contractor and the Projects Engineer was mainly by telephone, hence, there were slippages in the required documentation. The need for documentation of decision and instruction is recognised and is being enforced more rapidly.”

Following an award in 2006 for the purchase of text books in the sum of US$13,467 or G$2.779M, the Ministry inadvertently requisitioned a United States dollar draft for US$9,056.79, while paying the bank the equivalent of the contract sum in Guyana dollars.

The bank complied with the request and refunded the unutilised amount of $920,974 on September 4th 2006, the processing date of the United States dollar draft.

After inquiries about the delivery of the order, it revealed that the supplier was not in receipt of the draft, the Ministry on 14 January 2008 authorised the bank to void the draft and to process a new one.

Up to the time of the report however, the receipt of the books has not been established and the Ministry is still to account for the sum involved.

The Head of Budget Agency explained that the new draft processed was also misplaced and the matter was being investigated by the Ministry. The Audit Office recommended that the Ministry pursue the matter urgently and, if necessary, inform the police for further investigation.

The Ministry also failed to present vouchers and other documentation in support of the expenditure of $23.M reported under the subhead of the University of Guyana’s Berbice Campus.

In the circumstances, the completeness, accuracy and propriety of the expenditure could not be established.

The sum expended was part of an amount of $25M allocated for the purchase of computers and accessories, and library books; the completion of the science laboratory; and the payment of retention.