The House Anti-Corruption Committee has invited Auditor general Monthien Charoenpol for a meeting at parliament on April 30, to provide details of the State Audit Office building, which collapsed when a powerful earthquake struck Myanmar on March 28.
The committee chairman, Pheu Thai MP Chalard Karmchuang, said that they want to find out whether there was corruption involved in the project, vis-à-vis the materials used in the construction, and whether the construction methodology had been approved by experts.
He disclosed that the 2 billion baht used for the project did not come from the Budget Bureau, but from the SAO’s residual funds, accrued over the course of several years.
He said that, had the budget come from the Budget Bureau, parliament would not have approved the project because of its high cost, adding that the problems with the project would have remained hidden had there not been the earthquake.
Chalard also said that he has learned that, in 2020, the SAO had spent about 13.6 million baht to purchase 2,000 landline telephones, despite most officials having their own cell phones.
He admitted, however, that several state agencies often come up with excuses to procure things which are unnecessary, often at inflated prices.
Meanwhile, People’s Party MP Rukchanok Srinork criticised former auditor-general Phisit Leelavachiropas for saying that he felt sorry for the SAO building collapse, due to his wrong “Feng Shui” choice for the site of the building.
“The SAO building did not collapse because of the “Feng Shui” or because of the earthquake, but because of the deeply-entrenched corruption in government bureaucracy at all levels,” she wrote in her Facebook post today.
The opposition MP alleged that the SAO management had spent money on unnecessary luxuries, such as a mini theatre, imported carpets and furniture for its executives, but cut construction costs by changing the design of the building and by using substandard construction materials.
Rukchanok also criticised the government of doing nothing to effectively address corruption adding, “We should cease to accept that corruption is OK.”
