Analysis of the resubmitted supplementary budget indicates the following serious points of concern which require further investigation as part of the Independent Forensic Audit. Note Points 1 – 6 involve Ksh 1,443,287,801,while point 7 and 8 address a figure totaling Ksh 10,763,446,275.
POINT NUMBER ONE:
In moving the 'corrected' supplementary estimates the Minister for Finance stated the following which cannot be true:
'Clause 2 of the Bill provides for the issuance from the Consolidated Fund of the sum of Kshs 26,251,311,790 and to appropriate the funds for various services and purposes during the financial year ending 30th June 2009.'
This cannot be true. If one adds up all revisions of supply taken directly from schedule 1 of the Supplementary Appropriations Bill 2009 then the figure in Clause 2 ought to be Ksh 26,087,512,713. In his speech to Parliament,the Minister overcasts the amount required for supply by Ksh 163,799,077. This amount is not tied to any approved budget line item and is therefore liable to be misapplied.
POINT NUMBER TWO:
In moving the 'corrected' supplementary estimates the Minister for Finance stated the following which also cannot be true:
'Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker,Sir,Clause 5 of the Bill seeks for a reduction of the sum of Kshs 27,329,210,300 of the supply granted for various services for the Financial Year ending 30th June,2009.'
This cannot be true. If one adds up all revisions of supply taken directly from schedule 1 of the Supplementary Appropriations Bill 2009 then the figure in Clause 5 ought to be Ksh 27,257,209,471. In his speech to Parliament,the Minister overcasts the amount actually being reduced for supply by Ksh 72,000,829. This amount is not tied to any approved budget line item and is therefore liable to be misapplied.
Additionally,there remain discrepancies in the manner in which the changes to Appropriations-in-Aid have been calculated by the Ministry of Finance and represented in the Supplementary Appropriation Bill 2009.
POINT NUMBER THREE:
The total amount as stated in the First Schedule of the Bill as representing Appropriations-in-Aid to be applied for Recurrent Expenditure is Ksh 4,628,325,694 whereas manual calculation of the vote by vote sub-totals of expected Appropriations-in-Aid would total Ksh 4,488,352,694. The difference is an inflation of expected income by Ksh 139,973,000 thereby freeing up this money for application as recurrent expenditure elsewhere since it is not tied to any budget line items in actual fact.
POINT NUMBER FOUR:
The total amount as stated in the Second Schedule of the Bill as representing Appropriations-in-Aid to be applied for Development Expenditure is Ksh 5,224,272,310 whereas manual calculation of the vote by vote sub-totals of expected Appropriations-in-Aid would be a much larger total Ksh 6,060,015,957. The difference is an inflation of expected income for Development by Ksh 835,743,647 thereby freeing up this money for application elsewhere since it is not tied to any budget line items in actual fact.
And these are not the only arithmetical errors. There are more in the supplementary estimates which the Minister for Finance managed to get passed by Parliament on 20th May 2009.
POINT NUMBER FIVE:
In the Supplementary Estimates (Yellow Book) the Net Total of Supplementary Recurrent Estimates are declared as Ksh 722,095,510 whereas using a calculator and manually entering the figures in the same document would add up to a total of Ksh 630,297,262. The difference of Ksh 91,798,248 is not the subject of any Explanatory Note and could be applied elsewhere without Parliament ever knowing.
POINT NUMBER SIX:
In the Supplementary Estimates (Yellow Book) the Net Total of Revised Appropriations-in-Aid applied to Recurrent Expenditure are declared as Ksh 894,624,951 whereas using a calculator and manually entering the figures in the same document would add up to a lesser total of Ksh 754,651,951. In effect,Parliament would be under the misapprehension that the Government would be able to achieve a higher income than was actually possible,and thereby unwittingly create the possibility of misapplying Ksh 139,973,000 without Parliament ever knowing.
POINT NUMBER SEVEN:
The Minister has made changes to the revised estimates without amending the Supplementary Appropriations Bill 2009 raising the prospect that Parliament has approved sums not detailed in any law,and creating a loophole for misapplication of public funds.
The Joint Committee states that 'it was observed from submissions from Treasury that the total amount of discrepancy was Ksh 10,763,446,275 and this was from 211 lines from 36 Ministries.' The effect of this discrepancy was to under-report prior Parliamentary approval of money by Ksh 10.763 billion. All these discrepancies were attributed by Treasury to error caused by either deliberate or innocent computer manipulation.
The Criminal Investigation Department according to press reports has commenced an investigation into the cause of the error.
Nevertheless the Minister for Finance was directed by the Joint Committee to resubmit a fresh version of the Supplementary Estimates and which corrected the erroneous figures in the Printed Estimates Column which had been revealed after Hon. Imanyara’s intervention on 5th May 2009. The Minister reinstated the omitted figures in the Printed Estimates column but without amending the supplementary appropriations bill 2009 went ahead to also alter the revised estimates column in the resubmitted supplementary estimates to load the same amount across another 211 budget lines. He did this without informing Parliament and without indicating the same in any explanatory or other notes in the budget books he tabled and as a result parliament has given double approval of the said ksh 10.763 billion.
POINT NUMBER EIGHT:
At no point did the Treasury,or the Minister for Finance,admit either during or after the Joint Committee Report that there were other errors apart from the misrepresentation of the June 2008 approvals in one column of the Supplementary Estimates of 22nd April 2009 which was meant to tally the approved estimates as actually printed. As will be seen later,this is a critical point. No one expected that in making the necessary corrections,the revisions proposed in the discredited supplementary estimates tabled on 22nd April 2009 would themselves be subject to change. No one expected that the Treasury would seek to change what it had asked Parliament to approve between 22nd April and 20th May 2009.
http://blog.marsgroupkenya.org/?p=830
Are all the above typos?....
I mean fundamental analysis,you get me? Fundamental analysis of a business involves analyzing its financial statements and health,its management and competitive advantages,and its competitors
Isaiah 65:17-Look! I am creating new heavens and a new earth, and no one will even think about the old ones anymore