Six local councils spent a total of €2,266 on dinners during Christmas 2014, exceeding the allowed threshold by €366.
This was reported by the Auditor General in his audit of the 2014 local councils’ annual financial statements. The audit is carried out by five private firms on behalf of the National Audit Office (NAO).
The Auditor General complained that notwithstanding his previous years’ recommendations, there were still instances where the expenses incurred for Christmas dinners were beyond the set limit.
During 2013, seven local councils spent €1,276 more than their allowed threshold on Christmas dinners, disbursing a total of €3,076.
According to the local government department’s guidelines issued on January 21, 2011, a local council can only spend €30 per person on a Christmas lunch or dinner, and €15 per head in the case of a reception. These guidelines reviewed downwards the thresholds issued in September 2010, which were set at €50 and €25 respectively.
Public funds can only be used to cover the dinner expenses incurred by the mayor, councillors, the executive secretary and the council’s employees.
Two irregular scenarios were identified by the Auditor General. In the first one, the local council invited individuals who were not entitled to attend such an activity; the other situation was when the total amount incurred per capita was higher than that specified in the Local Government Department regulations. Last year, Kalkara council registered the highest departure from the applicable limits, spending €169 above the €270 that should have been spent.
Last year, Kalkara council registered the highest departure from the applicable limits, spending €169 above the €270 that should have been spent
Since the Vittoriosa council did not provide information about the number of persons who attended its Christmas party, costing €1,908, the NAO could not ensure that the department’s provisions had been adhered to.
Dinners were not the only Christmas headaches for the national auditor.
He remarked that the Msida council failed to provide the signed contract for the supply and installation of Christmas decorations and the tender’s bid bond.
Moreover, although the original offer was inclusive of VAT, the service provider lost his VAT exempt status following the tender submission, and was charging VAT – passing it on to the council.
In its financial statements, Paola council overstated the grant receivable in relation to a Christmas event by €500, when compared to the amount indicated in the grant agreement (€2,500).
During the 2014 Christmas and New Year’s Eve activities, the Victoria council requested bar owners to pay €200 or €350 each to cover a kiosk permit. The amount remaining after the statutory permit fee was deducted was considered as a sponsorship for other activities organised by the council during these festivities, even though the receipt does not state so. The NAO remarked that such charges are not in line with pertinent legislation.
Sta Luċija council failed to make a provision for the €1,600 payable with respect to Christmas decorations in its accounts. The council replied that the contractor sent the invoice after the closure of the 2014 accounts.
A similar situation was faced by Xewkija council, which did not provide for expenditure of €5,782, relating to professional fees for services, including decorations.