The health ministry’s spend of more than $619 million in the COVID-19 period, up to March 2021, without proper records and procurement management triggered a clash between Auditor General Pamela Monroe Ellis and permanent secretary in the ministry Dunstan Bryan at Tuesday’s meeting of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

Bryan, in a staunch defence of his stewardship of the pandemic spending, categorised the finding in the auditor general’s compendium report on COVID-19 expenditure as “less than useful”, saying it had no context, and demanded to know what laws had been breached.

Monroe Ellis pointed out that the audit was undertaken in May 2020, two months after the COVID-19 pandemic hit Jamaica, in order to provide guidance as well as to identify any missteps to give the Ministry of Health and Wellness and other ministries an opportunity to address the concerns of deficiencies highlighted.

The health ministry had received more than $8 billion to address the COVID-19 emergency.

“Apparently, at the heart of this [Bryan’s position] is that the expenditure of $619 million doesn’t fall under the procurement guidelines because they represented hotel facilities. I hold a different view,” she stated.

Pointing out that at that time those accommodations were closed and the Government had rented the space for people who were being quarantined, Monroe Ellis remarked that nobody was sent on a weekend trip.

“The aim of this audit is to ensure that there is transparency in the process, and accountability is upheld. He’s relying on a purchase order. The purchase order, as he says, can be used as a contract. That’s not in debate, but there are certain tenets that must be present. So, if it is going to be used as a contract, the terms of agreement must be clearly stipulated to hold the supplier accountable and to protect the Government,” said the auditor general.

The report, which was tabled in Parliament in November 2022, said there was a lack of transparency in payments to seven hotels and guest houses for quarantine accommodations. The ministry provided evidence of a formal contract with only one, according to the audit.

Monroe Ellis told the committee that the purchase orders “contain absolutely nothing that would amount to a contract”, adding that the ministry used the orders as payment vouchers.

She explained that purchase orders must set out clearly the specifications of the goods being procured or the terms of agreement of services.

“The purchase orders ought to come before the process, and signed off on. Oftentimes the purchase order was actually prepared after the invoice,” she said.

The auditor general said, because the permanent secretary was “hell-bent on holding on to this purchase order concept”, he had had failed to provide any evidence that he had satisfied himself that all the rules had been followed.

“It’s all we were asking for, it’s not intended to be a debate,” she insisted, to which Bryan retorted, “It is a debate, because I disagree.”

He said it was unclear which compliance rule was used in the audit, pointing to the exemption of travel services and hotel accommodations under the public procurement law.

However, Monroe Ellis said, “My position is, and will remain until the permanent secretary can provide more than an argument that these funds were spent with due regard for the proper governance system and the ministry, in fact, received value for money,” Monroe Ellis said.

But the permanent secretary argued that it was not for him to provide evidence as the report prepared by the auditor general has to be governed by the law.

“The auditor general is not at large. Her opinions do not bind me. The law binds me. Until the auditor general can provide, in law, under Section 25 of the [Public Procurement] Act, I have no obligation in law to adhere to any finding that is not predicated in law. The auditor general is obligated in law to state to me, a public officer, duly authorised, to give that assurance what law have I breached. This is what is wrong with this report; there is no context,” Bryan argued.

He explained that, at the time, the ministry did not know the exact number of rooms which would have been utilised, but knew it had to protect all vulnerable individuals in affected households.

“We had to move quickly. What we agreed on was a substantially reduced rate that the hotel told us that, in order to start up their plants they needed an advance, because they had to restart their air-conditioning and recall staff. What is egregious around this report is that the report robs the 223,000 persons of the health system the benefit of understanding their role and function in protecting this country against a possible disaster,” he said.

However, Monroe Ellis stressed that, while she understood that the COVID-19 situation was an emergency, that did not negate the need to ensure that the requisite guidelines were followed and that accountability and transparency were preserved.

The COVID-19 expenditure audit compliance compendium report on the ministries of health and labour, and social security, noted also that six service providers without a formal contract were paid a total of $293 million.

“In the absence of formal terms and conditions, the Ministry of Health and Wellness was exposed to unbudgeted liability claims and varying payment arrangements, in a context where one service provider unexpectedly asked the ministry to pay the facility’s electricity bill and 90 per cent of water charges,” the report stated.

The health ministry also paid out $124 million to eight suppliers for infrastructural works done as part of response activities between January and June 2020, without contracts in place. Concerns were also raised about the transfer of another $174 million to the Ministry of Local Government, National Solid Waste Management Authority, and a non-government organisation without the requisite approval of the finance ministry.