By Kiana Wilburg ?? ?Tempers flared in the National Assembly on Thursday as the Opposition passionately objected to Government using its proverbial scissors to cut most of the proposed budget estimates for 16 constitutional offices and other agencies.Finance Minister, Winston JordanIt was an auspicious occasion as it was the first time that the Constitutional offices and other agencies brought proposed estimates to the House. These were arrived at without the input of the Executive,Wholesale NBA Jerseys, specifically, the Ministry of Finance.This display of financial independence was credited to the recent amendment to the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act. The amendment brings the Act in line with Article 22 of the Constitution which supports constitutional offices and agencies enjoying such financial freedom.The estimates of the Constitutional agencies will be incorporated into the budget for 2016. When the 2016 budget is being considered by the House later this month, these sums which were already passed will remain untouched. They will be passed as part of the Appropriations Act.The sums for these agencies will have a first claim on the Consolidated Fund. This means that the full sum will have to be paid to the entities when the 2016 budget is passed and the entities will have control over how they spend it.Audit OfficeThe deliberations on the estimates for the Constitutional Offices and other agencies lasted into the wee hours of the morning. The first agency up for consideration was the Audit Office of Guyana which had a proposed budget estimate totaling $790M.But before the discussions could get underway, Opposition member, Irfaan Ali, said that, he, as the head of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), should answer any questions on behalf of the entity.Ali said,Wholesale China Jerseys, “The Audit Office does not report to any Minister. It reports to the Public Accounts Committee and therefore, since I stand as the Chairman of this Committee, it is only fitting that I speak on their behalf and not a member of the Executive.”The Opposition Member posited that should any member of the Government speak on behalf of the entity in this regard, then it would undermine the principle of having the entity insulated from the Executive when it comes to its finances.The Government however objected to this. In fact,Wholesale China Jerseys, a total of seven speakers from both sides of the House exhausted various arguments on whether the Executive should be representing the Audit Office on such a matter. Hours passed and no consensus was reached.Taking note of the gridlock in such unchartered waters, House Speaker, Dr. Barton Scotland, suggested that members select on both sides to use part of the recess to clarify the way forward on this matter.After over two hours of in camera deliberations, it was decided that Ali would speak on behalf of the Audit Office.Minister of Finance, Winston Jordan, took the floor and informed the House that while the entity is requesting $790M he is recommending $714M.The PAC Chairman objected to Jordan’s proposal stating that it is tantamount to starving the Office of the resources it needs for ensuring transparency and accountability. He said that should the House accept the reduction to $714M then it would be hampering the work needed to be executed by the office.In support of Ali’s position, Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo said, “With the change in laws to support the financial independence of these agencies, we expected that the proposed amounts would remain unaltered.“To now reduce the proposed allocation without explanations would be seen as politicking and flip-flopping on the part of this Government as they were the ones who called for the financial independence of these agencies when they were in Opposition.”Minister of State Joseph Harmon disagreed with the Opposition Members. He reminded the House that the total appropriation voted for the agency last year was $601M. He said that the $714M as recommended by Jordan represents an increase from then to now.He said, too, that it is a mere $76M reduction from what the office is requesting. Harmon said that based on his examination of the proposed budget estimates by the entity, the monies allocated for supporting staff employment and other critical areas were not touched.In light of his arguments, he challenged the former Housing Minister to show how the reduction would hamper the work of the AG’s office.Ali said, “We are considering a lump sum not line by line items and that is the poor inconsistency of your argument. I may be crazy but this crazy man will stand up and defend the interest of transparency.”The argument was also put forward by the opposition that if Government cuts the proposed budget allocations for these agencies then it is essentially te