Advertisement
JIS News

Cabinet has received the executive summary of the Sandals Whitehouse forensic audit, and has referred the report to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
Information and Development Minister, Senator Colin Campbell, told journalists at the Aug. 28 post Cabinet press briefing at Jamaica House, that the audit, in addition to the Contractor General’s report on the matter, would be tabled in Parliament on Tuesday, September 5, for the PAC’s deliberations.
The forensic audit on the Sandals Whitehouse project was commissioned by former Prime Minister P. J. Patterson and carried out by a committee chaired by architect, Desmond Hale.
Other members of the audit’s committee included quantity surveyors, Robert Wan and Calvin Roach; engineer, Grace Ashley; and former Permanent Secretary, Dr. Allan Curtin.
Minister Campbell informed that although Cabinet, had in fact, received the forensic audit, “we did not consider the full report; [it] will be before Cabinet next Monday (Sept. 4).”
Last month, Prime Minister, Portia Simpson Miller, said that she would pursue the necessary action to protect the interest of the country and the integrity of all the national institutions.
The Contractor General’s Report on the Sandals Whitehouse project was tabled in the House of Representatives on July 18. It recommended that the Urban Development Corporation (UDC), with the assistance of the quantity surveyor, be mandated to produce a comprehensive report, detailing, among other things, the rationale and justifications for the changes and cost overruns, associated with the project.
The investigation, which began in January of this year and concluded last month, was initiated following allegations of impropriety, which were made in the media and by the Opposition in the House.
The primary aims of the investigation were to: determine whether there was compliance with any applicable government procurement and contract award procedures; whether there were instances of irregularity or impropriety in the award of contracts; and whether the said contracts were awarded impartially and on merit, as well as to determine what the circumstances were behind the alleged overruns in time and cost in the implementation of the contracts.