APNU+AFC says Patterson ‘fit & proper’ to scrutinize how it spent $230B in 2016

Mar 27, 2021 News

…says ‘tainted’ Irfaan Ali had chaired Accountability Committee with no objection

PAC Chairman, David Patterson

Kaieteur News – Scrutiny of the spending undertaken by the coalition A Partnership for National Unity+Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) Government is at a standstill given the political posturing at the level of the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee’s Chairmanship.
In fact, the coalition maintains that the Constitution dictates that it is the opposition that decides on who is fit and proper to chair the accountability committee.
The ruling People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) has opposed the Chairmanship of the committee by AFC senior executive, David Patterson, over allegations of financial malfeasance in office leading to a conflict of interest in him assuming the post.
The APNU+AFC has since responded to the ruling administration’s posture, defending Patterson’s chairmanship of the PAC by saying they allowed the then opposition PPP/C appointee, Irfaan Ali, “to chair the committee (in 2015), despite being charged with multiple offences.”
Qualifying its position by pointing to Ali’s ‘tainted’ chairmanship of the Committee, the APNU+AFC has since accused the PPP Government of looking to dismantle the “guardrails of our democracy through the efforts of its members in the Public Accounts Committee.”
According to the APNU+AFC, “in this most recent instance, they seek to erode the meaning and spirit of Standing Order SO 82 (2), which grants the main Opposition in the National Assembly the right and power to select the Chairman of that Committee.”
PPP/C’s Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, Gail Teixeira, in a recent comment to this publication on the PAC brouhaha, had underscored that her party’s motion to remove Patterson as Chairman of the committee, was in no way an attempt to remove the portfolio of chairmanship from that of the opposition since this is guaranteed under the Constitution.
The APNU+AFC in its public missive reiterated the position that, “there is a significant history and an important purpose why this entitlement belongs to the main Opposition.”
The opposition said, “Scrutiny of spending and of all other financial matters demands impartiality; and, a Chairman from the Opposition appointed exclusively by the main Opposition is fundamental for such impartiality.”
Its statement however, ignored that the stalled PAC’s scrutiny of the Auditor General Report for government expenditure currently relates to 2016—the first full year in office by the APNU+AFC administration.
The APNU+AFC in its public missive said it finds reprehensible the artifice being utilized by the PPP to erode this entrenched norm, “which is to demand a removal of the duly appointed Chairman, David Patterson, via a no-confidence motion…The APNU+AFC maintains that the lawful selector of the Chairman of PAC is the main Opposition.”
The APNU+AFC was adamant, “the law and practice on this matter is certainly not who the Government finds unfit and improper, but who the main Opposition finds fit and proper. Otherwise, the Government by such a device of a no-confidence motion can become the final selector of the PAC’s Chair, thereby completely eroding the intent and purpose of SO 82(2).”
The coalition did concede, “This attempt at Mr. Patterson’s removal is what is stymieing the work of the PAC presently. It is absolutely not his absence, or inaction or stalling.”

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News