HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 253503,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/253503/?format=api",
"text_counter": 175,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Billow",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 260,
"legal_name": "Billow Adan Kerrow",
"slug": "billow-kerrow"
},
"content": "Mr. Speaker, Sir, we, indeed, asked for the minutes of the Cabinet which showed that it sat to approve projects relating to Anglo Leasing and Finance Company in 2001. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the contract that has been mentioned about the Forensic Science Laboratories was, indeed, signed on 15th August, 2001. We carried out an examination of the Controller and Auditor-General's Report on the passport issuing equipment deal. When it comes to examining the Controller and Auditor-General's Report on the Forensic Science Laboratories contract, anybody who has copies of the minutes will, indeed, appreciate that they show the fact that the Cabinet approved the Forensic Science Laboratories contract. Therefore, it is important to clarify that we were not able to obtain any evidence to the effect that the Cabinet approved specific contracts relating to Anglo Leasing and Finance Company. However, we were able to verify and obtain evidence that some of the senior civil servants knew who was behind the Anglo Leasing and Finance contract. A good example is one senior public servant who is mentioned in the Report, Mr. Oyula. He actually admitted on HANSARD that he had full knowledge that Mr. Deepak Kamani was the principal agent of Anglo Leasing and Finance Company. This information, apparently, was given to us by the officer and yet the Government has been telling Kenyans for a long time that there is no known person who is involved in the Anglo Leasing and Finance Company scandal. However, this confirms what Mr. Githongo has been telling us in his dossier, which is also covered here, that the Minister for Finance at one time asked Mr. Oyula to call Mr. Deepak Kamani and asked him to refund the money that was paid out to Anglo Leasing and Finance Company. Mr. Oyula's confirmation that he knew Mr. Deepak Kamani as the principal agent of Anglo Leasing and Finance Company proved the point made by Mr. Githongo. Mr. Speaker, Sir, we found out that there was a deliberate ploy by the Government to protect those people who were behind the Anglo Leasing and Finance scandal. A good example April 18, 2006 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 481 with regard to the passport issuing equipment by the Department of Immigration is when the former head of that department, Mr. ole Ndiema was actually asked to approve the payment of Kshs91 million. He declined to do so. He was invited by the then Permanent Secretary to his office. It is strange that when he came in the boardroom, the contract was pulled out by the Permanent Secretary and showed to Mr. ole Ndiema, his clerks, an auditor and an accountant so that they could sign the payment vouchers. Clearly, there was an attempt to make sure that this information was not known to all the parties who should have known. At the same time, we were told that there were strange things such as the Permanent Secretary, Mr. Mwaliko, telling the Committee that the contract documents were sent to London for Anglo Leasing Officials to sign and then sent back. Therefore, they claimed that they did not know who the principals of Anglo Leasing and Finance Company were. All these were attempts to divert attention. Mr. Speaker, Sir, was Anglo Leasing and Finance Company a mysterious company? Was it known to the Government? This Government was fully briefed on the Anglo Leasing and Finance Company projects which had been started and were ongoing when they took over power. This briefing was done in February, 2003. This Government has the detailed brief which was given specifically to the Permanent Secretary, Office of the President on those jobs which were ongoing by the time they took over power and those which had been proposed. Therefore, it is strange for the Government to say that it was not aware. That brief contained the name of Anglo Leasing and Finance Company which was handling the Forensic Science Laboratories contract. It also included the name of Sound Day Communications and Apex Finance Corporation. All these names were listed as part of the brief. All the credit pre-NARC contracts which were going on were provided to them. So, the Government wanted to investigate and find out whether those contracts should be stopped or not. They had an opportunity to do exactly that. Secondly, the Government also knew this company. In fact, we have a memo that was provided to us and it forms part of the evidence laid on the Table together with this Report. This document was prepared in June, 2004 by the Office of the President. It had a list of all the 18 projects and under each project names of the people who were believed to be directors, shareholders or owners of the company are listed. This document was presented to His Excellency the President for discussion in June, 2004. Mr. Githongo referred to this document as one of the things that disturbed him most. He wondered that in spite of the Government telling Kenyans for months on end that it did not know anything about Anglo Leasing and Finance Company, it, indeed, had a document prepared by its senior officers which showed the names of the people who were behind each of the companies. Therefore, it is painful and misleading to Kenyans when the Government pretends that it is looking for Mr. Deepak Kamani today and yet, two years ago in June, 2004 it knew that Mr. Kamani was one of the principal agents of the Anglo Leasing and Finance Company. It is a case of trying to shut the stables after the horses have bolted. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the total value of this contract is a staggering Kshs62 billion for the 18 projects. The money was paid in a short period between 2001 and 2003. In fact, by May, 2005 Kshs18 billion had been paid out to Anglo Leasing and Finance Company. Only Kshs1 billion was refunded to this Government. It, therefore, means that Kshs17 billion was paid to the Anglo Leasing and Finance Company contract and has not been recovered yet. It is also important to note that the 12 ongoing projects which had not yet been cancelled by the Government have a liability. The total liability as at February, 2006, with regard to the 12 ongoing projects amounts to Kshs16 billion according to the estimates made by the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Finance. So, if, today, payments were to be made as at February, 2006, this Government would be having a liability of Kshs16 billion to pay and yet no attempt has been made to cancel those contracts formally despite the claims that were made in 2004 that all payments with regard to the 18 Anglo Leasing-related contracts had been stopped. This was not the case. In fact, 482 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES April 18, 2006 some payments were made as late as May, 2005. The contracts have not been cancelled and are still going on. In particular, we have been able to verify that US$4.75 million was in fact, paid to Universal Satspace in May, 2005. This is a year after the Government had announced that it had suspended all payments. Mr. Speaker, Sir, it is important to note that the Anglo Leasing and Finance Company financing actually amounts to the Government financing itself indirectly. What happens is that money is paid upfront and the same money is used to pay suppliers. A good example is where we were informed by one of the witnesses, Mr. Oyula, that Anglo Leasing and Finance Company actually paid Euro 1 million to a French company with regard to this passport issuing equipment deal. If you look at it carefully, that amount of money actually represents the commission that was paid upfront by the Government to Anglo Leasing and Finance Company in 2003 when they signed the contract. With regard to political capability, there is no way we can fight corruption in this country unless we deal with it from the top. Unless we take political responsibility for our actions, we cannot deal with corruption. This is the same message that was given out by the Deputy Leader of Government Business when she spoke here. In our view, the Constitution is very clear that Government Ministers have general direction and control over their departments. In other words, they have to deal with matters regarding direction and control. They are the ones who are in charge of those Ministries. The Constitution is very clear that the secretary is responsible for supervision. There is a whole lot of difference between a supervisor and a director or controller of an institution. This general direction and control has been exercised in various ways. A good example is the approval of contracts. Each of the contracts approved by the Minister for Finance were preceded by a full written brief to the Minister. There is no approval of a contract that has been made by the Ministers without a written approval that has been given with regard to the contract. Approval by the Ministers and the Vice-President were in writing. Therefore, I want to mention here that several Permanent Secretaries have confirmed to us that they often take the trouble to brief the Ministers regularly on important projects such as these. They said that they normally put this in writing so that they are aware. They also look at all the circumstances relating to the project. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the practice we have seen in this country is that most of the Ministers do exercise more or less executive authority in some of their Ministries today. We have seen Ministers approving the appointment of CEOs, appointing senior officers and playing a more executive role in this regard. The important thing is to---"
}