The electoral office spent more than €4,000 on nine dinners during election time, including two for which no one turned up, according to an audit.
This expenditure during last year’s general and local elections was labelled “imprudent” by the National Audit Office.
It included €527 for liquors and wine but this amount was deemed not to be exhaustive since details on the photocopied chits provided for the audit were not always clear.
“This type of expenditure constitutes an imprudent use of the taxpayers’ money,” the NAO said.
The lack of supporting documentation further indicates that no controls are in place
The audit formed part of the NAO’s annual report on public accounts, tabled in Parliament on Monday. It noted the electoral office made a one-time payment of €4,251 to a company for various dinners at a restaurant during the election.
The bill included an €800 charge described as “stand-by time” for two booked dinners that no one turned up for on election eve and election day.
Election expenditure ‘imprudent’
When the NAO queried the reason for the no-shows, the electoral office replied: “Regretfully, the pressure of work did not allow the meals to be taken up.”
The NAO noted that six bills of the nine dinners attended were lower than the €400 charged for each of the evenings when the booking was not availed of.
Payment chits did not indicate the number of people who attended the dinners and the dates when they took place, the NAO said. “Notwithstanding, these bills were still authorised for payment by the [Electoral] Commission,” the audit office added.
The NAO also queried more than €34,000 spent on meals for police officers on election-related duties.
The bill was issued by the police department and footed by the electoral office even though no documentation was provided to substantiate that such a charge should come out of the Electoral Commission’s budget.
The electoral office defended the decision by saying it directly procured the meal service from the police canteen to avoid police charges escalating.
But the NAO insisted the cost-effectiveness could not be verified because no cost per person per meal was provided and no quotations were sought.
“The lack of supporting documentation further indicates that no controls are in place to ensure the Electoral Commission was only charged for meals consumed.”
The NAO also highlighted an instance of “excessive expenditure” related to the lamination, cutting and checking of voting documents. The exercise cost taxpayers €65,700.
For six days in January last year, electoral office staff and other part-timers were engaged morning and evening in an exercise that paid them a fixed amount of €900 each.
What the NAO found objectionable was that electoral office staff and other government employees seconded there were still paid the one-time payment even though they worked during normal office hours.
But the electoral office rebutted, insisting the one-time payment was given for a service unrelated to normal duties of the staff involved.
Management said it also reached an agreement with the tax authorities for a 15 per cent withholding tax on non-overtime payments for work related to the election process.
The NAO also flagged inconsistencies in overtime payments, concerns that had already been raised in a similar audit in 2006.
“In some cases overtime claimed was foregone and substituted by a lump sum, in other instances the commission decided to pay an extra allowance over and above overtime,” the NAO said.
In one case, a senior officer “who actively participated in the elections” received various payments totalling €4,640 for work during normal office hours. According to the NAO, this practice contradicts public service management code that bars overtime for those above salary scale 7.
‘Procurement accepted by political parties’
Political parties turned a blind eye to purchases running into hundreds of thousands of euros made by the electoral office without seeking quotations.
The direct reference to political parties is found in the National Audit Office’s annual report for 2013 that analysed the workings of the electoral office.
The NAO said the electoral office did not seek quotations for purchases amounting to more than €300,000. The office defended its action: “Procurement was sought from suppliers of trust and accepted by political parties.”
The NAO insisted this practice constituted “unfair competition and unequal opportunities” to others willing to provide the required goods and services.
kurt.sansone@timesofmalta.com