( L - R ) Hay-Webster and Mullings

Members of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of Parliament spent much time yesterday trying to determine whether a minority report should be submitted along with a majority report into the Sandals Whitehouse affair.

There was sharp disagreement between Government and Opposition members on how to conclude the report into the US$43 million cost overrun on the project.

Government member, Sharon Hay-Webster, told her colleagues that there was no need for a minority report, explaining that the final draft reflected the committee's deliberations.

Divergent views

According to Mrs. Hay-Webster, there were three areas of major disagreement, which meant that there was general consensus on the interpretation of the evidence presented to the committee.

However, she suggested that strong divergent views could be noted as part of the conclusions and recommendations of the committee.

"If you go the route of a minority report," said Hay-Webster, "it means the whole report would have to be recast and presented separately".

But Clive Mullings, Opposition member, disagreed, pointing out that members of the committee might not agree with some of the conclusions of the report and therefore should be allowed to submit a minority report.

"If at the end of the day you have a sufficient number of persons who may not constitute a majority, but who share a view and have a degree of dissonance with what is happening in the final report, there is no harm in a minority report," he recommended.

Government member, John Junor, warned committee members against what he described as the "blame game", noting that all the parties involved in the project had some degree of culpability for the massive cost overrun.

He said committee members had no funda-mental disagreement with the recommendations in the draft report, which sets out measures to prevent a recurrence.

Presentations at next sitting

However, Mr. Junor invited both Opposition and Government members to meet separately, and identify areas that they agree on in the report, and make presentations to the committee at its next sitting on Tuesday.

Chairman of the committee, Mike Henry, accepted the proposal and adjourned the meeting. At its last meeting, Opposition member Audley Shaw asked that a financial audit and forensic financial audit of the Sandals Whitehouse project be conducted by an independent body.

However, this proposal was not accepted by the committee.