|
Joint Declaration by the SDF Parliamentary Group and the CDU in Respect of the Examination of the Budget of the Ministry of Post and Telecommunications for the 1999/2000 Financial Year by the Finance Committee on June 20, 1999.
The examination of the draft budget of the Ministry of Post and Telecommunications for the 1999/2000 budgetary year by the Finance Committee on June 20 1999 was marked by a serious incident.
This incident occurred at the end of the general discussion of the Minister?s presentation when the SDF tabled a motion for rejection. No counter-motion having been tabled, the motion ought normally to have been considered adopted but, unfortunately, the Chairman of the Committee, in violation of this internationally recognised principle in respect of the conduct of meetings, attempted to disregard the said principle by giving the floor once more to the Minister in charge of relations with the Assemblies.
Faced with strong opposition from the SDF and CDU Committee members, he made an about turn by beckoning on the CPDM Committee members to table a counter-motion but this was very late and unacceptable. The SDF and CDU Committee members, unable to stop this calamity finally had to withdraw from the hall when the Chairman ruled that the Minister?s report stood adopted. The question is: how come this embarrassment?
A law of November 1998 had liberalised the Telecommunications sector and created three para-statals to wit: CAMTEL, CAMTEL-MBILE and the Agency for the Regulation of Telecommunications (ART). In application of the provisions of this law, the Minister of Post and Telecommunications and the Minster in charge of the Economy and Finance co-signed Ministerial order No. 21/MINFI/MINT of 26 may 1999, instituting a transitory period ending on June 30th 1999, during the Ministry of Post and Telecommunications must transfer to CAMTEL. CAMTEL-MOBILE and ART, the entirety of the Telecommunications network (including personnel and movable and immovable property) previously belonging to the Directorate of Telecommunications and INTELCAM.
The said Ministerial Order specified that from July 1999, CAMTEL shall be in charge of the emission and recovery of telephone and other bills, and CAMTEL-MOBILE shall do same in its own domain of activity.. In other words, from July 1, 1999, if we take away the personnel of the Directorate of Posts which is in the course of being fused into the Societe Nationale des Poste du Cameroon (SNPC), only about 159 personnel would remain in the Ministry of Post and Telecommunications to ensure the supervisory mission.
Thus, on June 20, 1999, the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications appeared before the Finance Committee to defend a budget standing at CFA22.425.000.000. Scrutiny by the Committee members revealed the following:
- REVENUE
- Contribution from CAMTEL to the budget of MINPOSTEL - CFA16.380.000.000. The Committee found this sum very exorbitant having regard to the drastic reduction of the activities of MINPOSTEL in favour of CAMTEL as from July 1, 1999. Moreover, the criteria for the determination of the said sum was unknown given that to date, no such criteria has yet been adopted for the division of revenue between CAMTEL and CAMTEL-Mobile. Is this not disguised embezzlement?
- Recovery and Litigation (BLR) (CFAF1.000.000). Here, it concerns outstanding telephone bills as at June 30, 1999, all the structures and the personnel of INTELCAM and the Directorate of Telecommunications are transferred to CAMTEL. Committee members wondered how MINPOSTEL could in this circumstance carry out recovery and litigation, when this function now fell within the competence of CAMTEL to which all the personnel had been transferred. This looked unjustified and suspicious.
- Interests on Deposits at the Bank (CFA160.000.000). Accrued interest on sums deposited at the bank is the joint property of CAMTEL, CAMTEL-Mobile and ART to be shared amongst them. What therefore could possibly justify this budgetary head?
- EXPENDITURE
- Subventions to dependent parastatals (CFAF5.417.000.000). This budget head did not exist in the 1998/1999 budget, whereas, there existed dependent structures in the like of the school of P & T. What justifies this budgetary head when all the dependent structures have their own sources of revenue?
- Renovation of central services (CFAF600.000.000). In the 1998/1999 budget this provision stood at CFAF100.000.000. On what property will these renovations take place when MINPOSTEL is virtually devoid of property and personnel?
- Rent of Buildings (CFAF300.000.000). Virtually all the services having been transferred, the committee members did not see what use those rented buildings would serve.
- Payment of areas of preceding financial years (CFAF1.240.000.000). What is the nature of these payments? If they concern telephones then they have been transferred to CAMTEL or CAMTEL-Mobile.
- Payment of authorised advances (CFAF350.000.000); idem
- Security ? Yaounde (CFAF150.000.000); idem
- Payments for preceding years (CFAF190.000.000); idem
- Other telecommunication projects (CFAF180.000.000). The activities of telecommunication have been transferred to CAMTEL CAMTEL-Mobile and ART so the committee members concluded that this budget head had no basis.
- Acquisition of vehicles (CFAF36.000.000). In the 1998/1999 budget. CFAF80.000.000 was provided and vehicles have been bought. This is double budgeting.
Questioned on these figures and manipulations, the Minster of Post and Telecommunications, Mounchipou Seidou found as response only that the parliamentarians should have faith in him and his services. He even attempted in his presentation speech, in disregard of the Joint Ministerial order of May 26, 1999, t he Economic and Financial Report of the Minister in charge of Economy and Finance, to deny the existence of the deadline of July 1, 1999, for the effective take off of the activities of the newly created parastatals.
Faced with this inconsistency, the SDF and CDU committee members had no other option than to move that the draft budget be rejected in its entirety.
Unfortunately, they came face to face with the bad faith of the members of the Party in power who in the first place refused to move a counter-motion but finally rallied behind the diversionary manoeuvres of their comrade, the Chairman of the Committee. Once more the CPDM found itself caught in its own trap.
Done in Yaounde, this 20th day of June, 1999
Hon Joseph Mbah-Ndam,
Leader of the SDF Parliamentary Group
Hon. Njifako Yaka Simon,
CDU Member of the Finance Committee
The end
More documents
|
