Tweet
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><SPAN class=TopStory>'Prove it, Mr Christie'</SPAN>
<SPAN class=Subheadline>Barbara Clarke challenges C-G's conflict of interest charge</SPAN></TD></TR><TR><TD>
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width=134 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>
</TD></TR><TR><TD><SPAN class=Description>CLARKE. I was never interviewed</SPAN></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><P class=StoryText align=justify>Petcom chairperson Barbara Clarke is challenging Contractor-General Greg Christie to show conflict of interest in her dealings with the state-run company and to provide factual evidence that she exerted undue influence in the award of a contract to her private firm.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Clarke also rubbished Christie's statement that she was interviewed during his office's probe into the procurement practices of Petcom, saying that while she met the contractor-general's investigator, she was not questioned by him.<P class=StoryText align=justify>"I was never interviewed. I walked in on an interview with Mr (Desmond) Thomas," Clarke told the Observer in an interview late last month.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Clarke said that she had gone to see Thomas, the Petcom general manager, when she met the contractor-general's investigator, who was sitting in Thomas' office asking questions.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Thomas, she said, introduced her to the investigator and asked her to sit in on the interview.<P class=StoryText align=justify>"He was asking Mr Thomas questions and at one point he leaned forward and I noticed on one of the papers he had, the name Elegant Traders," said Clarke.<P class=StoryText align=justify>"I said to him, 'excuse me, are you doing a Petcom investigation or an Elegant Traders investigation? because I see there the name Elegant Traders and that is my company'."<P class=StoryText align=justify>The investigator, she said, did not answer, so she took out one of her business cards, offered it to him and told him that any questions he had about her company could be directed to her and she would be willing to answer.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Again, she said, the investigator did not answer, so she left the room. She was never contacted by the investigator, she said.<P class=StoryText align=justify>"I was never given a chance to speak about my company," Clarke added.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Christie, in his report tabled in Parliament on January 16, had said that both Clarke and Thomas were interviewed by his office. He repeated the claim in a news release on January 18 in which he described as "baseless, obfuscatory and misleading" challenges to his report made by Clarke, Thomas and Petcom.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Christie, in his report, had said that the Petcom board awarded 18 contracts worth just under $5 million, for training Petcom staff and promoting the company's products, to Elegant Traders over the last 3 1/2 years.<P class=StoryText align=justify>"The investigation also concluded that Ms Clarke was, at all material times, the majority shareholder, principal and managing director of Elegant Traders Limited, and that a conflict of interest existed wherein Ms Clarke, in her position as chairperson of Petcom, had the capacity to influence and, from all appearances, may have influenced the award of contracts to her business interest, Elegant Traders Ltd," Christie's report said.<P class=StoryText align=justify>However, Clarke, in her response, said that the contractor-general's report was erroneous and pointed to the fact that she had declared her interest at the first board meeting she attended, in May 2005, after her appointment and had, in June 2006, withdrawn from any supply opportunity to Petcom.<P class=StoryText align
<SPAN class=Subheadline>Barbara Clarke challenges C-G's conflict of interest charge</SPAN></TD></TR><TR><TD>
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width=134 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>
</TD></TR><TR><TD><SPAN class=Description>CLARKE. I was never interviewed</SPAN></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><P class=StoryText align=justify>Petcom chairperson Barbara Clarke is challenging Contractor-General Greg Christie to show conflict of interest in her dealings with the state-run company and to provide factual evidence that she exerted undue influence in the award of a contract to her private firm.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Clarke also rubbished Christie's statement that she was interviewed during his office's probe into the procurement practices of Petcom, saying that while she met the contractor-general's investigator, she was not questioned by him.<P class=StoryText align=justify>"I was never interviewed. I walked in on an interview with Mr (Desmond) Thomas," Clarke told the Observer in an interview late last month.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Clarke said that she had gone to see Thomas, the Petcom general manager, when she met the contractor-general's investigator, who was sitting in Thomas' office asking questions.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Thomas, she said, introduced her to the investigator and asked her to sit in on the interview.<P class=StoryText align=justify>"He was asking Mr Thomas questions and at one point he leaned forward and I noticed on one of the papers he had, the name Elegant Traders," said Clarke.<P class=StoryText align=justify>"I said to him, 'excuse me, are you doing a Petcom investigation or an Elegant Traders investigation? because I see there the name Elegant Traders and that is my company'."<P class=StoryText align=justify>The investigator, she said, did not answer, so she took out one of her business cards, offered it to him and told him that any questions he had about her company could be directed to her and she would be willing to answer.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Again, she said, the investigator did not answer, so she left the room. She was never contacted by the investigator, she said.<P class=StoryText align=justify>"I was never given a chance to speak about my company," Clarke added.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Christie, in his report tabled in Parliament on January 16, had said that both Clarke and Thomas were interviewed by his office. He repeated the claim in a news release on January 18 in which he described as "baseless, obfuscatory and misleading" challenges to his report made by Clarke, Thomas and Petcom.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Christie, in his report, had said that the Petcom board awarded 18 contracts worth just under $5 million, for training Petcom staff and promoting the company's products, to Elegant Traders over the last 3 1/2 years.<P class=StoryText align=justify>"The investigation also concluded that Ms Clarke was, at all material times, the majority shareholder, principal and managing director of Elegant Traders Limited, and that a conflict of interest existed wherein Ms Clarke, in her position as chairperson of Petcom, had the capacity to influence and, from all appearances, may have influenced the award of contracts to her business interest, Elegant Traders Ltd," Christie's report said.<P class=StoryText align=justify>However, Clarke, in her response, said that the contractor-general's report was erroneous and pointed to the fact that she had declared her interest at the first board meeting she attended, in May 2005, after her appointment and had, in June 2006, withdrawn from any supply opportunity to Petcom.<P class=StoryText align