So, how different is the Former Government's use of supplementary appropriation bills to validate spending after the fact, as compared to the ruling government's use of these types of bills?
If you ask members of the Opposition, UDP, they insist that it's the very same thing and that the ruling government's use of supplementary bills is a classic case of hypocrisy. But is it? That's what we asked the PUP's Leader of Government Business:
Hon. Eamon Courtenay - Leader of Government Business
"They had patten and practice, consistently of spending billions of dollars for years without parliamentary approval, and long after bringing to parliament - without disclosing what was spent on. Secondly, they - we took them to court, and the Chief Justice at the time pronounced on it. So, there is no question about the illegality - and in fact the criminality - in relation to that. What you have here is that the law does make provision for expenditure without parliamentary approval, subject to rules. It must be brought to parliament at the next available sitting. It must not exceed a particular amount. We have, as far as we can, comply with that."
Daniel Ortiz
"What's that particular amount, sir?"
Hon. Eamon Courtenay
"It's usually 10% of the amount that was approved. So, if there is a budget line item of $100,000, 10% of that."
Daniel Ortiz
"So, will we see a reduction in the practice of supplementary going forward?"
Hon. Eamon Courtenay
"Well, again, you have a situation where -let's say a hurricane comes, let's say a drought happens. Let's say a drought comes. Let's say another type of pandemic, we can't say to you that there will not be another supplementary. If another part of the highway falls in, we can't say to you that there won't be another supplementary."
Daniel Ortiz
"Isn't an easy road to abuse the use of the supplementary, if you start to accept it as something that can and may be done, something that you all complained that the last government did."
Hon. Eamon Courtenay
"No, Daniel, you are having a fundamental misconception. A supplementary can approve an expenditure that has already taken place. A supplementary is also used to appropriate to make the expenditure. I'm talking about the approval to make the expenditure afterward. I'm not talking about approving expenditure. Those we want to reduce, absolutely. But, I say that there are emergencies. There are things that pop up immediately, and you have to deal with them. And you deal with them through the use of the Contingencies Fund. That's the way the constitution sets it up. The intention is to come to parliament prior to expenditure. That's the intention, but with exceptions, and where the exceptions exist, we intend to comply with the law."
