FACTS OR OPINIONS?

Dec 25, 2015 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

The Government of Guyana made a huge mistake when it appointed auditors whose principals were highly critical of the former government to undertake audits of state entities.
It is not that these persons are not capable of being objective; it is simply a case that their findings are going to be disparaged and discredited on the basis that findings are being made by persons who had been critical of the very government which they were asked to investigate.
For that reason alone, the forensic audits will not be able to be admitted in a court of law, because there will be claims and counter arguments about possible conflicts of interest. There will be interminable legal challenges to the admissibility of these audits.
The biggest disappointment is, of course, the State Asset Recovery Unit, an entity that has employed more political operatives than professional accountants.
This is not to say that the political operatives cannot be objective. They can. It is just that because of their political affiliations, their findings will be subject to the suspicion of being politically biased.
The government has spent an obscene sum of money on these audits and on the State Asset Recovery Unit, and therefore, questions will be asked sooner or later as to whether the cost of these audits is justified, in relation to the sums that are recovered.
One audit report is said to have ordered that the entire Cabinet be charged because they undertook a project without a proper feasibility study being done. Well, if persons are going to be charged for allegedly making poor investments, then how far do we take this standard?
What about those involved in the failed bicycle factory, the failed glass factory, the many white elephant projects under the PNC, the failed paint company, the failed Sanata Complex, etc?
Should the Burnham Cabinet be subject to the same treatment as is being recommended for the PPP Cabinet?
I suppose a case can be made that poor investment decisions constitute public malfeasance, but I am not certain how many of these types of matters have been prosecuted, and prosecuted successfully.
A major company has collapsed in the Bahamas. It has thrown the entire economy of the Bahamas into a tailspin. One single hotel project has disrupted the entire economy of the Bahamas.
Yet no one is asking that the government be charged for making that investment?
What should be investigated is the collapse of Clico in Guyana and the investments that were made in the same Bahamas, and which are not now recoverable. What should be investigated was whether there was regulatory failure. What should be investigated is whether there was the misuse of insider information, in terms of the withdrawals by persons of their monies in Clico (Guyana) just days before it was deemed bankrupt. Those are what people want to know about?
The government is going to be embarrassed by these forensic audits. These audits are calling for the government to do certain things which the government may not feel that it can successfully do, and therefore the government is going to be embarrassed by its non-action on the findings of these audits.
The government should try to redeem the situation. A huge question mark will hang over the credibility of these audits if any persons are charged arising out of the findings of those audits. The very credibility of the audits as the basis of charges is going to be challenged.
The government should avoid this dilemma. It should try to redeem the problem that it now faces because of its insistence in appointing critics of the former government to undertake some of the forensic audits. The government should assemble all of the reports of the forensic audits and then appoint an international auditing firm to verify that the findings are grounded in law and not opinions, and that the audits meet international standards.
This will allow for greater credibility to be given to the audits, rather than the barrage of concerns being expressed over these audits, and whether they are based on facts or mere opinions, as is being alleged.

Latest News

FACTS OR OPINIONS?

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | November, 20th, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Green Machine returns to RAN Sevens

GASA snubs Delroy Tyrrell for World Championships

Cricket Australia appoints former West Indian...

GBA appoints International Technical Officer...

Warriors triumph but Royals lead standings

D-Up Basketball Academy Training camp brings...

Features/Columnists

A false panacea for electoral integrity

Rising Gun Crimes in the Caribbean: Urgent Action required by all

President Ali’s tough love

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

FACTS OR OPINIONS?

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show | November, 20th, 2024

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]