In this era of fiscal restraint, produced by the recent global financial crisis and deepened by our government's spending pledges following the implementation of value-added tax (VAT), it is not uncommon to hear that expenditure once considered vital must be either postponed indefinitely, or discontinued altogether.
For example, throughout the term of the current administration, and over the course of its predecessor's time in office, we have heard that back pay, overtime and other benefits owed to key sectors of the public service simply could not be afforded. Questions may arise over the extent to which our government's fiscal difficulties are self-inflicted; but one way or the other, by now we have all become familiar with the language of constraint.
Last week, the House of Assembly informed Public Accounts Committee (PAC) Chairman Hubert Chipman that Parliament does not have the funds to grant his request for public hearings of the PAC's planned probe into the Bahamas Agriculture and Marine Science Institute (BAMSI).
Controversy surrounding the project erupted after it was revealed that the male dorm, which was destroyed during a fire in January, was not insured as required by the Ministry of Works, prior to the mobilization of contract funds.
Minister of Works Philip Brave Davis initially said the contractor, Audley Hanna, had everything needed to complete the project, including all-risk insurance. However, he later admitted that Hanna only presented a quote from a local insurance company, never actually paying any premiums. Attempts to discover if any other buildings under the BAMSI project lacked insurance before the fire have been resisted by government.
Parliament's budget may not allow for hearings into this issue, but the government should nevertheless step in and make up the shortfall, even if this means diverting funds from less important commitments.
The BAMSI controversy goes to the heart of many problems we face as a nation today, including the very domestic factors that have contributed to our fiscal shortcomings in the first place. These include: a gross lack of oversight, transparency and accountability on the part of government; negligence or incompetence in the execution of public projects by contractors, and relationships between contractors and governing politicians of sufficient closeness to raise concerns about possible conflicts of interest.
In seeking to bring about public hearings into this matter, the FNM is taking the right approach. The opposition can only do the Bahamian people a service by forcing open debate on this and a host of similar cases - for example the Small Home Repairs (SHR) project, which a recent auditor general's report called in to troubling question on a number of levels.
At the end of the day, responsible fiscal management is about getting value for money spent. The public airing of many areas of governance kept secret in The Bahamas for decades - to the detriment of the majority of citizens - is a good way of ensuring a meaningful "bang" for our buck.
Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian
