Govt. spending authority during a prolonged parliamentary recess

Dec 29, 2025 Letters

Dear Editor,

On December 21 and 23, I wrote to highlight concerns about year-end public spending practices and the growing number of high-value procurements appearing to fall outside the 2025 estimates of expenditure as presented to parliament. Those letters addressed the risks associated with compressed year-end procurement and the importance of transparency in the use of public funds.

Since then, additional facts have emerged that raise a distinct and more fundamental oversight question.

Tender evaluations dated mid-December 2025 have been published for significant projects, including works under the Ministry of Home Affairs, while new requests for proposals have been issued by the Ministry of Housing and the Central Housing and Planning Authority. Yet, as of this writing, there are no corresponding contract award notices publicly posted, nor is there a gazetted supplementary appropriation or warrant identifying the budget authority under which these commitments are to be financed.

This situation must be considered alongside a critical institutional reality: the 13th Parliament has held only one sitting to date and has not met since November 3. There is no constitutional or procedural impediment preventing parliament from being convened to transact the people’s business, including the consideration of supplementary estimates or other financial authorisations. Legislative activity does not depend on the turn of the calendar year.

Against this backdrop, public statements by senior officials that frame substantive legislative reform as a 2026 undertaking reasonably raise the question of whether parliament is expected to play any meaningful role in authorising or scrutinising expenditure in the closing days of 2025, notwithstanding that nothing prevents it from meeting now.

This is not a repetition of concerns about year-end spending. It is a question of process, legality, and accountability:

How is expenditure authority being lawfully created and disclosed during an extended period in which parliament has not been convened and therefore cannot approve supplementary appropriations?

The constitution and the financial management and accountability act require that public expenditure be authorised by parliament or, in limited circumstances, by warrant subject to subsequent parliamentary scrutiny. Where procurement activity continues during a prolonged parliamentary hiatus, the public is entitled to clarity on:

the specific estimates lines, virements, or warrants being relied upon;
the sequence between tender evaluation, award, and financial authorisation; and
when and how parliament will be afforded the opportunity to review and regularise such expenditure.

These are not academic questions. They go to the heart of parliamentary oversight and the protection of the taxpayer.

As parliament prepares for the new fiscal year and, hopefully, the early resumption of legislative business, these matters will require careful examination to ensure that procurement practices remain aligned with constitutional principles, fiscal law, and the fundamental role of the legislature in authorising the use of public funds.

Yours faithfully,
Sherod Duncan, M.P

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Letters, parliamentary, Recess, Sherod Duncan

Latest News