The following is an extract from the Minutes of Executive Council , for the meeting held on Thursday January 19, 2012
REIMBURSEMENT OF TELEPHONE BILLS TO HON CHIEF MINISTER
EX MIN 12/17 of 12 January 2012 refers.
Council agreed that the following statement by the Hon Chief Minister should be reflected under EX MIN 12/17 of 12 January 2012:-
“I did not ask that the telephone bills be paid to me immediately but at a later date because the long delay in attempting to settle these bills meant that in principle something had to be done now. In my response I mentioned among other things that I had been in written communication with the Government of the day continuously and that was why it was still a live issue”.
The Hon Chief Minister made a further statement as follows:-
MATTERS ARISING FROM MINUTES OF 89TH MEETING
1. “The structure of the minutes needs to be re-organised and I do not cast any aspersions on the Clerk of the Council because the structure as reflected on this particular minute belies a deeper problem that I have previously raised with the Council.
2. In this same minute dealing with the reimbursement, you will observe that what the Governor has said on the issue is reflected as a full quotation statement. However, what I have said in response is done in bullet form as a summary of what I have said in response, thereby denying me, especially on an issue of this importance, the right and entitlement to be recorded in direct speech in the same way as the Governor has. For the record as well, the summary has not captured all that I said nor indeed all the bases of my response. This kind of formulation especially within the context of minutes being made public needs greater parity, and even-handedness.
3. I have made mention of the fact that the mechanism of how meetings in Executive Council are being transacted encourages this lack of equity. For the record I again state that the concept of not being able to record meetings for the purpose of the record and the reasoning put forward by the Deputy Governor and Governor that it is not economically feasible is in my view unacceptable. It is unacceptable because under the same concept of transparency and good governance to which you, Governor, constantly refer, the recording of the meetings of Executive Council becomes essential to how the people’s business is being dispensed. It cannot be that only the Governor’s direct speech is noted for the record and my response is denied to be recorded in direct speech.
4. There is sufficient technology existing that all meetings at Executive Council can be recorded and preserved and even if the Budget of the Anguilla Government cannot accommodate it, the UK Government in the interest of the same transparency which it touts, should be happy to encourage our attempts at transparency and make it happen.
5. As it pertains to that part of the minute under caption, ”Further Statement by HE The Governor on 12th January 2012”, I wish to take issue with the words of the Governor’s statement that “no clear audit trail has been presented to ExCo…” and also his further statement that “…the need for a proper audit trail remains, particularly for such a large claim during our current fiscal challenges”.
1. I take issue with the statement because it is a mis-characterisation and not in keeping with the facts. Let us look at the facts again.
2. I raised the issue of the non-payment of these bills which for the record were in the possession of the previous administration – such that having raised the issue it was the then PS, Home Affairs that presented the bills and indeed the memorandum to ExCo.
3. To suggest that there has been no audit trail or that none was presented to ExCo is a broad term that casts the impression that somehow these bills were not verified or indeed may even go as far as to suggest that they were not legitimate. The statement is smoke and mirrors since the Treasury submitted a statement showing that it was the normal policy during that time period for official calls to be paid by the Treasury, separate from personal calls which were paid by the Office holder.
4. You, Governor also know that in fact the comment about the lack of audit trail is a mis-characterisation since the bills were in the custody of the then PS, Home Affairs and were verified by him.
5. For you to “dissociate” yourself may be your right, but to suggest that there was something dubious and questionable about the monies owed to me when the same has been verified by the Treasury Department and was also known to the PS who has had custody of the bills since the then PS, Finance, Mr Carl Harrigan turned them over to him. In my view that kind of statement from you is inevitably to create discord.
6. I intend to bring a formal proposal for having meetings recorded. However, in the interim I put forward as a decision now to be taken by ExCo that:-
a) all minutes of ExCo are to be circulated within 3 days of any meeting as opposed to the current system of minutes being delivered one day shy of a week after meetings (typically a Wednesday afternoon) just prior to ExCo on a Thursday. It is insufficient time especially in the context of how minutes are currently being recorded.
b) all minutes to be circulated to the Press are to be agreed as between the Chief Minister and the Governor prior to publication”.
The Hon Deputy Governor indicated that the representations as regards the PS, Home Affairs were misleading.
HE The Governor pointed out that the Chief Minister had agreed to his remarks being recorded in bullet form and could have presented a “direct speech” version had he wished. Proposal 6 (b) was already in operation, as all members of ExCo agreed to the minutes before publication. The Clerk indicated that proposal 6 (a) would not be practicable.
