GOVERNMENT members of the joint select committee (JSC) of Parliament reviewing the Integrity Commission Act 2017 on Wednesday used their majority to push through a recommendation by St Catherine South Western Member of Parliament Everald Warmington for a change in the rules that make the auditor general (AG) a commissioner of the Integrity Commission (IC).

Under Section 8 of the IC Act 2016, the “Commission shall consist of the following persons appointed as commissioners — the auditor general and four other persons appointed by the governor general, by instrument in writing, after consultation with the prime minister and the leader of the Opposition”.

But Warmington has repeatedly charged that the auditor general’s presence on the IC is in breach of the constitution. He has also suggested that lawmakers erred when they included the auditor general as a member of the new Integrity Commission.

During Wednesday’s sitting of the committee, Government members argued that with the IC receiving nearly $2 billion annually from the State, it should be subjected to the type of rigorous audit that only the AG’s Department can conduct.

At present the IC is audited by an independent accounting firm, but for Warmington and other Government members that audit is not comprehensive enough for the level of resources that pass through the commission each year.

But the two Opposition members present at Wednesday’s committee meeting — Dr Morais Guy and Julian Robinson — objected.

“I don’t have a difficulty with the auditor general being a commissioner of the IC. If the basis is that the AG audits a particular commissioner, I don’t think it is done by the AG; in fact, it is not done by the AG,” said Guy.

Robinson told committee members, “I support the auditor general remaining a member of the Integrity Commission. In my understanding, where audits are done of the Integrity Commission, they’re done not by the Auditor General’s Department, but by an independent accounting firm which removes that issue of a conflict of interest. I will not support her removal from the Integrity Commission.”

In response, Government member Tova Hamilton joined other colleagues in backing the proposal.

“The reason I believe that a third party is used for audits is because the auditor general is part of the commission,” she said.

“If it is that the office is removed from the commission, then the auditor general can undertake the necessary audit as it relates to bodies of that nature. The audits that are currently done are not similar to the audits that the auditor general would normally do,” Hamilton insisted.

For his part, Warmington pointed to sections 120, 121 and 122 of the constitution which deal with the appointment of public officers.

He said the sections make it clear the responsibility of the auditor general, and that the person cannot be a part of any other board or body.

“So, in effect, this is a breach of the constitution, including her as a commissioner. This is the basis in which I recommend that the auditor general be excluded as a commissioner,” said Warmington.

Like Hamilton, Warmington argued that the type of audit done by the auditor general is completely different from the audit you get from private individuals.

“You need performance audits and all of those and those external bodies do not go in-depth with complete audits and reports to Parliament as is required by the auditor general,” he said.

Despite Warmington’s statement, Solicitor General Marlene Aldred told the committee that there was nothing in the constitution that prevented the auditor general from being a member of the IC.

Aldred pointed out to the committee that the office of a commissioner was not a public office as defined in the constitution.

Despite this clarification, committee member Minister of Justice Delroy Chuck joined ranks with his colleagues.

“We are dealing with a body that is being provided with almost $2 billion worth of Government money. The Integrity Commission is almost as big as many ministries and it requires, in my view, the full force of the Auditor General’s Department to investigate, not only the IC — not that I’m saying they have done nothing wrong — but it must be clear to Parliament how the funds provided are being used,” argued Chuck.

“I am sure we can find other good persons to become commissioners, not that we have anything against the auditor general being a member in terms of the integrity of the person, but it seems to me, to ask another public institution to audit the Integrity Commission is so unnecessary when we have a body like the Auditor General’s Department that can do it.

“Save and except that we have made it mandatory for [the AG] to be on the commission, when I’m sure we can find five other commissioners to be appointed,” Chuck added.

Government Senator Sherene Golding-Campbell also supported the recommendation.

She noted that the issue has been a controversial one since it was first mooted about two years ago, but argued that the auditor general being unfettered from the IC would strengthen rather than weaken the commission.

Fellow Government member Pearnel Charles Jr advanced a similar argument.

“When the matter of potential conflict has been raised, even the perception of it is problematic, even if it were not to be seen as real. If we can avoid that then we ought to do so, and the principles of good governance and even separation require that those who audit, or who provide external oversight over a particular body, shouldn’t participate in the decision-making within the same body,” declared Charles Jr.

The committee is scheduled to meet all day today to wrap up its deliberations and prepare its final report to be submitted to Parliament, but Chairman Edmund Bartlett left no doubt that it will recommend that the AG be ditched.

“We can tick that box,” quipped Bartlett.