–urges a tightening of the breaches

THE Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on Monday meticulously questioned the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) on a number of issues relating to its operation and utilisation of warehouses in 2015.
Among issues raised was the inability of warehouse owners to fulfill their agreed obligations to the Authority.
An audit conducted in 2015 by the Auditor General’s Office discovered that two of the vehicles lodged and registered at a warehouse owned by Car Care were missing. That inspection was on April 14, 2015.
But according to a report received by the PAC, a second visit on April 26 revealed that the cars had somehow re-appeared, and that based on evidence presented, the GRA had not authorised their release in the first place. It was also found that there was no evidence that duties and taxes totaling $2.867M were paid.
It was also reported that during the auditors’ second visit to the Car Care warehouse, it was discovered that the two vehicles were positioned differently from the way they were on the first visit. Permission was also not granted by the GRA for anyone to access the warehouse and re-arrange the vehicles.
Deputy Head of Customs Excise and Trade Operations, Patrick Hyman was called upon to explain the situation. In response, Hyman said follow-up visits subsequent to the discovery of the missing cars were done at the warehouse, and a number of modifications were done to restrict unauthorised access.
Car Care has outrightly rejected any breach of the premises, but had made some adjustments to the facility.
‘IT NEVER HAPPENED!’
According to PAC’s Bishop Juan Edghill, “Haymer indicated that the warehouse owner vehemently denies this occurrence.It never happened!
“This is putting the integrity of the Audit Office under question, as against the warehouse owner. The verification to determine who was right and wrong has to do with the authority responsible for restricting the movement of vehicles from the warehouse. That was GRA.”
At this point, PAC Chairman, Irfaan Ali exclaimed, “Somebody had to move it and bring it back!” Turning to Hyman, he enquired, “Who caused the vehicle to move? Did you come up with an individual?”
But alas! These were questions that Hyman had no answers to. It was also noted that the facility has no surveilance camera, which resulted in PAC recommending that from henceforth, all warehouses must have cameras installed, and that the footage thereof must be maintained for at least 30 days.
The installation of cameras and keeping of footage for at least one month, Ali said, would, in the long run, prove beneficial to GRA.
Edghill, however, felt that the matter was being taken too lightly; that an audit is “a very serious matter.”
He next asked whether a representative of the GRA was present when the audit was done, and whether it was the same officer who returned on April 26, when the cars re-appeared.

SOMETHING GRAVELY WRONG
Hyman responded in the affirmative, which prompted Ali to deduce that something was gravely wrong with the picture. “Something is wrong!” he said. “And if you cannot derive by yourself that something is wrong here, then we have an even worse problem.”
But it seemed that there were more questions than Hyman had answers for, as he could not state whether the official continues to work at the Authority. He also admitted not knowing the name of the officer, and was perforce tasked with providing the PAC with all relevant information.
The GRA official was also asked to state why the officer did not report his findings to him, and what disciplinary actions would be taken, but again, he could not provide an answer. It was also disclosed during the round of questioning that the warehouse was under dual control.
Asked further whether the warehouse was written to as a result of the disappearance of the cars as should have been protocol, Hyman said doing so was unnecessary as the said officer who was present when the cars were discovered missing, returned to the warehouse the following day and found that they had been returned.
“The notice was not served because they went back the following day and saw the cars,” he said in his defense.
Hyman said Car Care was warned and advised if there were additional breaches, then their licence would be revoked, but that warning was verbally done. He explained that the usual procedure is to serve the warehouse with a notice saying that items were found to be missing. The warehouse, in turn, has seven days to respond, failing which GRA takes action.

‘DOESN’T SMELL NICE’
This prompted Ali to interject: “This here doesn’t smell nice; have to call a spade a spade here.
“If I was the officer-in-charge, the least I would have had is a warning in writing to someone; we can’t tell the people out there that miraculously two cars re-appeared the next day.” He added that the only reason the cars were returned was because the information was leaked.
“Somebody must have informed somebody! The car can’t just re-appear the next day!” Ali said;as other PAC members demanded that a thorough investigation be done.
“This calls for a massive investigation,” one member stated, even as Hyman struggled to answer why five other warehouses were shut down, but Car Care remained operational despite similar breaches.
In light of insufficient information, the PAC Chair was forced to discontinue the session, which he said will resume in two weeks’ time.