Red flags

Clerk to the Houses of Parliament (HoP) Colleen Lowe instructed staff to proceed with two multimillion-dollar projects despite internal concerns about procurement compliance, according to correspondence obtained by The Sunday Gleaner. The records also show Lowe warning that failure to follow her instructions could result in disciplinary action.

The correspondence sheds new light on decision-making around two projects flagged in a 49-page Auditor General’s Department (AuGD) report released earlier this month: the $24-million renovation of the Members’ Lounge and the $3.2-million purchase of air-conditioning units. The audit did not reference the internal concerns or Lowe’s written directives.

The audit identified procurement breaches in both projects, including the use of improper procurement methods, lack of budgetary provision, and failures to document justification for emergency actions.

Hours after The Sunday Gleaner sent questions to Parliament on December 18, Lowe sent an email to staff warning about confidentiality obligations under Staff Orders and the Official Secrets Act, a colonial-era law that criminalises unauthorised disclosures.

MEMBERS’ LOUNGE

In a memo dated August 13, 2024, titled ‘Emergency renovations of members’ lounge’, Lowe wrote to the acting director of public procurement, copying the then director of corporate services, expressing concern about what she described as hesitation in advancing the project.

“Your memo gives the impression that you believe you are being asked to breach the procurement process and or engage in illegal activities,” Lowe wrote. “This perception is unfounded, as the justifications for the renovation have been clearly outlined, and the process is intended to be conducted with full adherence to established procurement laws and guidelines.”

She urged the official to act quickly in uploading bidding documents and warned that any additional costs caused by delays could result in personal liability and surcharge.

The bid deadline was August 19, and the contract was awarded on August 29. The Sunday Gleaner has not seen the memo authored by the procurement director that prompted Lowe’s response.

The auditor general later found that no documentary evidence supported the designation of the project as an emergency. HoP told auditors that references to an emergency and to restrictive bidding in evaluation documents were “inadvertent administrative errors”.

Auditors identified multiple breaches, including the signing of the contract in October 2024 after works were already completed by October 4; the absence of security provisions such as a performance bond; and the unauthorised modification of the bid when the procurement director requested a $1-million discount from the eventual contractor.

The report also cited inconsistent procurement methodologies, absence of a proper needs assessment, and failure to include the renovation in procurement and budget plans.

AC UNITS

Internal concerns resurfaced in March 2025 over the acquisition of 16 air-conditioning units. A facilities and operations manager said the purchase was done on an “urgent” basis, partly to avoid losing funds allocated for another AC-related project.

The audit noted that the facilities manager wrote to Lowe on March 18 seeking approval to pay invoices for the units. Lowe approved the request on March 20.

Auditors found that the purchase was made without a proper needs assessment, budgetary allocation, correct procurement method, or a signed contract. Although HoP records indicated that an assessment and a health concern existed, those documents were never provided to auditors.

In response to the findings, HoP told the AuGD that Lowe’s involvement was limited to discussions with Appliance Traders Limited (ATL) about replacing the central AC system, a separate project. It said her approval of invoice payments was “strictly post-facto based on the understanding that due process had been observed by the responsible officer” and that she did not authorise the initial procurement.

However, internal emails suggest concerns about due process were raised before Lowe approved the payments.

In a March 19 email, a senior officer wrote to the facilities manager to confirm details of a verbal conversation after observing the installation of the AC units “without prior communication about the availability of funds”. The email, copied to Lowe, questioned why correct procedures were not followed and warned that processing payments without approvals would breach government regulations.

Email exchanges continued over the following week.

On March 25, five days after Lowe approved the invoices, the facilities manager said several invoices remained unpaid despite services already being rendered. But the officer said they were “unable to accept any documents” in alleged breach of procurement guidelines.

Amid the March 25 email exchanges, the clerk asked the two officials to “desist from sending numerous cross-messages, as this back-and-forth is not helping to resolve the matter at hand”. She then asked for a submission of the list of outstanding unpaid vouchers.

The facilities manager responded with the list later that day, stating six outstanding invoices, including those for the AC units. On March 26, the clerk then asked for the costing for five of the invoices, which the facilities manager provided.

Later on March 26, Lowe emailed the senior officer providing justification for the items. She said the facilities manager would submit detailed responses and added: “We anticipate that these invoices will be justified based on ongoing procurement practices and contracts with ATL.”

She concluded that HoP had ensured procurement processes complied with the Public Procurement Act and requested approval for the payments.

The senior officer replied that the payments could not be processed due to non-compliance and warned of potential surcharge for unauthorised payments.

Lowe responded by insisting that the payments be processed immediately.

“As the accountable officer for this organisation, I am responsible for ensuring the smooth functioning of operations, and my instructions are final in this matter,” she wrote.

She added that if the officer believed the payments breached procurement regulations, p“they must be paid first”, after which the matter could be referred “to the appropriate authorities for any necessary investigations to be conducted”. Failure to comply, she warned, would be considered insubordination.

These exchanges were not referenced in the AuGD report or HoP’s written response.

The audit concluded that the AC units were procured using the wrong methodology, without a formal contract, warranty, budgetary evidence, or needs assessment.

The senior officer involved was later interdicted or suspended by the Office of the Services Commissions. No official link between the procurement dispute and the interdiction has been publicly established. Other emails show the staff being accused by colleagues of acting with “sinister” intentions.

CREDIT CARD TRANSFER

The correspondence touch on another audit finding: a J$28.96-million transfer to Parliament’s credit card account that went undetected for about four months.

According to the audit, HoP said an official instructed the Bank of Nova Scotia on January 28, 2025, to transfer the Jamaican equivalent of US$181,026.73 from a debit account to HoP’s US-dollar credit card account. HoP said the bank attempted verification with account signatories but failed to follow up with the principal financial officer (PFO).

HoP said a new PFO later identified what it described as an unauthorised withdrawal and contacted the bank, before the finance ministry instructed cancellation of the card.

In response to The Sunday Gleaner, Scotiabank declined to comment on specific transactions but said written requests are processed once verified and properly approved. It added that currency conversions are done at prevailing rates, explaining why a lower amount was returned in June.

However, correspondence obtained by The Sunday Gleaner shows a bank representative rejecting claims of error, stating that the transfer was processed according to written instructions and verification procedures.

“We can confirm that the processing of the transaction was not due to an error on the part of The Bank of Scotia Jamaica Limited,” the bank told an official, according to the correspondence.

Because the funds moved between two HoP accounts and signatures were authenticated, the bank said no callback verification was required.

RESPONSES

The Sunday Gleaner submitted questions to Lowe on December 18, asking whether she authored the memos and emails; whether she still stood by those instructions in light of the audit findings; whether the internal correspondence was provided to the auditor general during the audit; and for a response to Scotiabank’s position.

There were also questions about the interdiction issue and other matters.

“These areas are protected by law and cannot properly be addressed through media correspondence,” Gordon House said in an emailed response on December 22. It cited the Data Protection Act, the Official Secrets Act, and the Constitution.

After the questions were submitted, Lowe emailed staff pointing to “a matter of serious institutional concern”.

“It has come to my attention that information contained in internal communications, which were clearly administrative in nature and circulated strictly on a need-to-know basis, appears to have found its way into the public domain,” she wrote, referencing the Staff Orders and Official Secrets Act.

Lowe cautioned that “breach of the act may expose the officer concerned to criminal sanctions, in addition to internal disciplinary consequences”. She said “any unauthorised disclosure of official information will be treated as a serious breach of duty” and may be escalated for formal investigation.

The Auditor General’s Department declined to comment on whether it received the correspondence or whether its absence affected the audit.

Speaker of the House of Representatives Juliet Holness has defended Lowe’s performance at Gordon House, saying she has been making efforts to reform and strengthen accountability in the administrative arm of Parliament.

“She has done a remarkable job and continues to do so area by area by area, cleaning up,” Holness said on Nationwide Radio on December 10. She added that resistance to tighter controls had generated “accusations, accusations and spite”.

Holness said she had not yet fully reviewed the audit but described the credit card issue as “a major concern” and characterised the transfer as “an error where the Parliament wrote a letter [and] the bank did the transaction incorrectly”.

The speaker further stated that “persons are also going to need to be prepared [for] sanctions and actions to be taken against them so that will be the next step in this process.”

editorial@gleanerjm.com