- Given the lack of trust in both the Treasurer and the General Secretary, as noted by party historian Arnold "Scree" Bertram, there is no chance that the call would have been heeded.
- Furthermore, Horne stated that senior members were involved in the diversion of funds intended for the Party, then it would be safe to assume that some of those implicated would be part of the officer core.
- What would be the sanctions or incentives to those implicated to turn over the funds in a "full, transparent, and confidential account"?
- Is there an inherent conflict/tension between "transparency" and "confidentiality"?
The stated purpose of this exercise is that such funds "can be applied to all outstanding debt". It is therefore essential that the validity of those outstanding debts be established.
For example:
- Was the appropriate authority given in the process of incurring such debt?
- Are the debts in question properly documented?
- Are the sums subject to interest and are the interest rates "reasonable" in all the circumstances?
- Is there any conflict of interest between those advancing the monies and those authorizing/approving?
There is no evidence provided that outstanding balances are in excess of the Party's debts. Accordingly, there is no guarantee that anything will be there to be applied to the budget for the Local Government Election which is overdue.
Aside from the election defeat post mortem and the pandering to polite notions of transparency, accountability, and integrity, this entire episode seems to be nothing more than a last ditch effort to get the party ( the financiers thereof) to liquidate some of the substantial debt the Party is said to have incurred.
What on earth is "a financially independent PNP" that the Horne- led Treasury is committed to building? Bulls...
No comments:
Post a Comment