KINGSTON, Jamaica— The war of words between the Integrity Commission (IC) and some Government Members of Parliament (MPs) continued on Tuesday when the MP for St Catherine South Western, Everald Warmington, doubled down on his demand for a full audit of the Commission.

He was hitting back at comments made by IC Chairman, Retired Justice Seymour Panton, following Warmington’s call last week for an audit of the commission to be undertaken before it receives any more funding from the government.

The commission is funded to the tune of $2 billion annually.

Warmington’s call last week, came on the same day the commissioners of the IC appeared before the Parliament’s Integrity Commission Oversight Committee (ICOC), where there were some tense back and forth between Panton and the IC’s executive director Greg Christie on the one hand, and government MP Pearnel Charles Jr on the other. Warmington did not attend the ICOC meeting but later, during a sitting of the Standing Finance Committee of the House, called for the audit. He received support from outgoing finance minister Dr Nigel Clarke.

Panton hit back swiftly in a statement in which he accused some lawmakers of not reading the very laws they pass. He also noted that the accounting and financial affairs of the commission have been audited every year in its six years of existence. “The audits, in each case, have been conducted by an independent external auditor whose appointment has been approved, in writing, by the minister of finance himself,” said Panton.

READ: IC concerned Parliamentarians do not know the law after Warmington’s audit call

During Tuesday’s sitting of the House of Representatives, Warmington used a “personal statement” on the motion of adjournment to revisit the matter. He argued that the annual reports referred to by the IC are mere financial statements of its financial transactions and financial positions “and is not an audit of this critical government agency”.

“What I demanded is a full compliance value for money audit of the Integrity Commission to audit and examine its management and administrative control, security control, information technology control, external and internal controls, human resources practices, policies and procedures and oversight procedures,” he said.

The controversial MP went on to explain the differences between a financial statement audit, which he noted, focuses on the accuracy and completeness and presentation of financial data, ensuring compliance with accounting principles.

On the other hand, he related that a value for money audit focuses on the three Es – the economy, which is minimising cost; efficiency, which is maximising output; and effectiveness which speaks to achieving intended outcomes.

“It looks at operational performance rather than just financial accuracy,” Warmington emphasised. He argued further that such an audit cannot be conducted by the Auditor General’s Department since the Auditor General, Pamela Monroe Ellis is a commissioner of the Integrity Commission, a decision he has long opposed, citing a conflict of interest.

Warmington said any auditor selected to conduct the value for money audit of the IC must be selected by the oversight committee.

Cheered on by his government colleagues, he told the House that “all the posturing, misinformation, misleading statements or the denigration of members of parliament and insults by the chairman of the Integrity Commission can never, and will never deter me from demanding an audit report for the Integrity Commission before any more funds are provided by Parliament to this entity”.