Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 650665,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/650665/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 222,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "In this category, the expenditure in question could not be justified under any circumstance. In instances like this, the Committee recommended immediate recovery or surcharge of the individuals who received the funds. This seems to be a frequent recurrence in many other counties. (2) Instances where procurement rules were not followed but goods and services were supplied as per the details of the requisition. Instances where the county government used restricted tender method instead of open tender method, goods were delivered as per the details of the Local Purchase Order (LPO), the Committee depending on the oral and written submissions recommended that the respective accounting officer be reprimanded for not following the public procurement rules and regulations and be required to submit a report to the Senate on administrative actions and austerity measures taken to mitigate against committal of similar offences in the subsequent financial years. (3) Instances where procurement rules were not followed and the Committee could not ascertain that the public funds appropriated were used diligently:- The Committee recommended that the Office of the Auditor-General undertakes the value for money audit on that specific project and submit a report to the Senate within a period of one year. (4) Instances where procurement rules were not followed and goods and services delivered did not match those goods requested for by the procuring entity. The Committee took the view that this was a fraudulent transaction and recommended that the officer who authorised payment should be surcharged and held personally liable for the loss of public funds in question. (5) Instances where an irregularity occurred and the county government detected it and took disciplinary action against the officers involved. The Committee was lenient in such cases. Depending on each case cleared the audit query and no further action was recommended. (6) Instances where procurement rules were not followed but the Committee ascertained that no public funds were lost in the transaction. The Committee recommended that the audit query be cleared and no further actions were recommended. (7) Instances where the county government failed to submit the required documents during the time of audit but subsequently submitted the documents to the auditor-General and the documents were examined and the Auditor-General was satisfied with the evidence submitted. The Committee cleared the audit query but recommended that the county government should submit the documents to the Auditor-General at the time of audit. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, having done that, the Committee made the following general observations:- (1) The executive arm of the county government regularly used the restricted tendering in the procurement of goods and services. This was in contravention of the existing public procurement rules and regulations. The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes only. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate"
}