Mea Report

[Dent]

Can anybody tell me if the KPMG report, into whether the MEA loans were illegal, has been completed. If so has it it been released in full to the public, if not when is it due?

[Chinahand]

Not sure if you're getting things mixed up?

 

PKF undertook a detailed investigation into the MEA's operations between 1st March 2001 and December 2004.

 

They showed the powerstation project was approximately 120 million over budget, but did not raise any serious issues with misappropriation etc. It said:

 

Subject to the resolution of the [KMPG investigation into the loans see below] ... we have found no evidence to suggest that either the Government departments involved or the MEA have acted other than as they each saw fit under their perceived remits. Nevertheless it is apparent that those perceived remits, taken in aggregate, were insufficient, allowing a very substantial breakdown in communication between the MEA and Government, as a result of which Government has not been sufficiently cognisant of developments at the MEA.

 

The report is available at:

 

http://www.gov.im/cso/

 

KPMG are the auditors for the MEA. They have NOT been tasked to produce a public report, however they have raised concerns about how the loans that funded the overspend were taken out.

 

The PKF report quotes them saying:

 

"KPMG’s preliminary view of [the MEA's treatment of the loans] ... is that it is not supported by

contemporaneous documentary evidence. KPMG have requested confirmation from the Board of

the MEA of the proposed treatment and further documentary evidence to support it. As at 24 June

2005, the latest practicable date prior to issuance of this report, they had not received such

confirmation or evidence. "

 

I'd be intrigued if anyone else can explain this, but as far as I know they will either conclude there isn't a case to answer and the accounts will be signed off or else they'll issue court proceedings under the audit act. That is the only public way Joe Bloggs will find out what they think.

 

Also there is another enquiry - a Tynwald select committee - which as far as I am aware hasn't done anything yet and won't do anything until KPMG makes a final decision or a court case ends.

 

I'm sketchy on this, but I think thats right ... anyone else know better?

[Mr. Sausages]

Other than the civil service, Barclays is the biggest employer on the Island. So they'll get their money back no matter what. I expect the reports will attempt to justify that, no matter what.

[Gladys]

I thought KPMG had applied to the court for a ruling on whether the loans were legal. Last I recall on that was that questions were asked in Tynwald regardign amking public the ruling but the repsonse was that it was a private applciation by KPMG.

 

Its all gone very quiet though, apart from the letter from the MEA Chairman explaining that the recent price hikes were nothing to do with the borrowing accompanying another stonking bill!

[P.K.]

I would still like to see the justification for the pipeline. Over here gas prices have gone up something like 30% in 18 months. The UK is now a net importer of gas. Basing your energy strategy on a dwindling resource does seem a little strange to say the least.

[Paul H]

I would still like to see the justification for the pipeline. Over here gas prices have gone up something like 30% in 18 months. The UK is now a net importer of gas. Basing your energy strategy on a dwindling resource does seem a little strange to say the least.

I was under the impression that the new power station could be easily changed over to run on oil if there was a sudden increase in the price of natural gas. Perhaps they anticipated an increase but hoped that the would benefit form the gas pipeline in the short term, obviously much shorter than they expected?