U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB # 84
THURSDAY, JUNE 14, 2001 1:35 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
Q: Can we go east to Iraq? Can you tell us about this $6 million that
you're asking for for the INC? The other day we were told that -
MR. REEKER: I don't know if it is a question of asking for $6 million.
It is about notification of an additional $6 million under the money
that is already there.
As you know and as we have discussed numerous times, we continue to
cooperate closely with the House of Representatives and the Senate in
our joint efforts to support the Iraqi National Congress and other
elements of the Iraqi opposition to strengthen their efforts to
represent the true voice of the Iraqi people. So as part of this close
cooperation, the Department is sending to Congress a notification that
we will allocate additional funds in support of the Iraqi National
Congress. As you noted, the notification is for up to $6 million. And
what it is technically is a notification to Congress of an intent to
obligate money for interim funding while we continue discussions with
Iraqi National Congress on their programs and activities.
I think as you know, the INC has previously received grants totaling
close to $4.3 million using these funds in organizational capacity
building, media and public diplomacy activities, gathering of
information on war crimes, et cetera.
Q: Will this money be disbursed before the audit is complete?
MR. REEKER: We anticipate that the new money will be used to continue
the programs already ongoing under the current grant agreement -
overhead, costs for offices, staff, media operations, things like that.
I guess what you are referring to is the Office of Inspector General's
audit of grants and contracts. And as Ambassador Boucher said a couple
of days ago, this is very much a routine audit. This is the kind of
thing that goes on. It is therefore routine that a grantee, like the
Iraqi National Congress, would continue to receive funding and support
while the audit is being performed because, as we said, the goal of the
audit and the expectation of the audit is to provide us then with
recommendations on how to improve the Iraqi National Congress's
management of its programs and accounts, and anticipate that that will
actually enhance more their ability to -
Q: You haven't answered the question, though. The question was will
this money be disbursed to the INC before the audit is complete. You
seem to be saying - want to say yes, but you didn't -
MR. REEKER: Well, I can't tell you when the audit is going to be
complete, first of all. That is up to the Inspector General, and the
Inspector General -
Q: I mean, is the audit in any way an obstacle to the disbursement of
the -
MR. REEKER: No. There we go. We answered your question. No. I
thought that was pretty clear, Jonathan.
Q: So this is simply the money that when - that was explained to us
to help them keep going while the audit is being done and while the
other money, or other additional money, is suspended?
MR. REEKER: Right. As you know, there is a pot of money and it gets
drawn upon, and we notify Congress when we intend to obligate the
money, thereby drawing upon that money.
Q: Where does this pot of money come from?
Q: Under the rainbow.
(Laughter.)
Q: No, but how much was approved when - excuse my ignorance.
MR. REEKER: We would have to go back. We have been over this so many
times here, Jonathan.
Q: No, we haven't.
MR. REEKER: Yes, we have. We have discussed the Iraq Liberation Act
and the funds that were -
Q: You mean this is part of the 1997 milieu, then, or the '98 milieu?
Q: Yes, it is.
Q: It's not. It's not.
MR. REEKER: I will have to go and check on that for you.
Q: Isn't it true that this money is not for use inside Iraq?
MR. REEKER: I would have to check. This money, the 6 million we're
talking about, I think is a continuation of the programs that they have
had under their current grant agreement - overhead costs, as I said,
offices, staff, media operations.
Q: So then, as it stands now, the INC is not allowed to spend any of
this money inside the country; is that correct?
MR. REEKER: I know that some funds have been used for gathering
information on regime war crimes and human rights abuses and engaging
in diplomatic contacts with regional governments and international
organizations. So I would have to go back to the original grant and
get you the details on what that specifies.
Q: I just want to make sure I am absolutely clear on this. When the
audit began, in general, money to the INC - funding for them - was
suspended, right, pending the completion of the audit? And at the same
time, I remember Richard - I think it was Richard - saying that you
were looking into ways to help them keep the ship afloat while that was
going on.
I just want to make sure, this money that you're talking about now is
that money that he was -
MR. REEKER: This will help them do that.
Q: That he was talking about before?
MR. REEKER: Yes, I don't think he was talking about specific money.
With that said, we were looking at ways -
Q: This is a way?
MR. REEKER: This will do that. In terms of using the audit for how
they can improve their management of programs, their accounting
procedures, that should be very useful in then looking ahead even
further in what we will do in terms of cooperation with them.
Q: So this money is not necessarily going to go for new programs such
as transmitting programs into Iraq via satellite or humanitarian aid
efforts or that sort of thing, or is this just going to go for paying
salaries and phone bills and -
MR. REEKER: As I understand it, this money will go to continue
programs already ongoing under the current grant agreement. And funds
under that grant agreement have been used for a variety of activities,
like organizational capacity building, public diplomacy activities,
media activities, gathering information, that type of thing.
Q: You said audit was sort of regular or routine. Was it because -
was it envisioned from the beginning of the program, or was it
initiated because there was like some fraud or mishandling of money?
MR. REEKER: Well, the Office of the Inspector General does reviews on
a very regular basis on contracts and grants that are awarded by the
Department. It is a very regular and normal thing. "Routine" is the
word that we have used.
Having worked in the field where our posts may oversee these grants, I
am quite familiar with those types of audits, to look at the grant and
make sure that proper practices are being observed and to make
recommendations where things could be improved, because we are always
looking to make the programs better.
So while those go on, it is very routine for the program to go on, for
that grant to continue in its activity so the grantee, in this case the
Iraqi National Congress, to continue receiving funding and support
while the audit is being conducted.
Q: So there was no wrongdoing by them that -
MR. REEKER: No one has suggested wrongdoing. It is simply a review of
implementation of this grant, and it includes all kinds of things like
accounting practices, bookkeeping, et cetera.
Q: Can I follow up on that? Isn't this the second audit? I mean,
wasn't there a - like this routine audit happened and some
irregularities were found, which kicked it over to the Inspector
General's Office, which primarily investigates abuse and fraud and
waste and things like that?
MR. REEKER: I would have to go back and check. That is not correct.
The Inspector General's Office is not charged with primarily
investigating abuse and fraud.
Q: Well, that is what is says on the website.
MR. REEKER: They do investigations to look for such things. There is
no suggestion by having an audit or an inspection by the OIG, the
Office of the Inspector General, that such things have taken place.
They inspect operations, bureaus, embassies, consulates, offices within
the Department. That is why we have an Office of the Inspector
General.
But to characterize it as you did that that indicated suspicion or
anything like that, that would not be correct.
Q: Weren't there some irregularities found in the first audit, which
then demanded that the Inspector General take a second audit? I guess
that's my question.
MR. REEKER: That I am not sure of. I would have to go back and check
what the genesis was. I would be happy to look into it.
Q: If I could also add, if there is any way to - I recognize you
don't know this now, but just to give us a sense as to how many audits
the IG does and -
MR. REEKER: They put out a report every year, I think, that lists -
Q: With all of their - and how long? Like what the average length of
an audit would be?
MR. REEKER: That might be extremely different because they run so many
different types of audits - small grants, giant things.
Q: I mean of this nature, of a similar size grant, how long do these
types of audits take, just to kind of get a sense as to how long the
money -
MR. REEKER: I'll see if they want to do that. They don't comment on
their things, and I don't think they will want to give you things to
try to compare and contrast audits because then you will inevitably try
to create some impression out of timing which may have no relevance to
the actual situation. So we'll look into it.
Q: Will this be public when it's over?
MR. REEKER: Generally, I don't know that OIG reports are made public.
Aspects of them may be. I'll look into that. I can't recall, Chuck,
if when we talked about it before - I would have to go back and look.
I know there is usually an unclassified inspection report of certain
inspections. I just have to check in with the OIG's office and see
what they can tell me on that.
Q: Isn't an audit, by definition, done to see if there are any
irregularities?
MR. REEKER: Yes.
Q: Because you are unsure of their management practices?
MR. REEKER: I think then you would have to say they were unsure of all
management practices. Audits are done as a positive - in a proactive,
positive approach.
Q: You're giving them another $6 million when you're not sure whether
they're managing it correctly.
MR. REEKER: Matt, when what you are trying to do is look for ways to
make a grant even more effective and accounts, you don't just halt
everything in the world. There is no indication that there is a
problem here. What this is is a routine audit. While that audit is
ongoing, obviously it would be routine that a grantee would continue to
receive the funding and support. And they will perform the audit, and
we hope that that will provide us with recommendations. That is what
the results of an audit usually are: here are some recommendations on
how to improve their management, programs of accounts, how we can then
work more effectively together.
Q: So you give them 6 million to waste on however you -
MR. REEKER: That is an entirely irresponsible comment, Matt. There is
no suggestion of that whatsoever. And to suggest that, I totally take
--
Q: I was led to believe earlier - was it Monday - that funding to
the INC had been suspended pending the end of the audit.
MR. REEKER: In terms of taking on new grants, Matt. In terms of
taking on new projects. And what we will do in the future with the
INC, we will obviously wait until we move ahead and have a better
vision. In fact, the audit should help us with that because we can
make recommendations from that on how we can use the money better.
There is no suggestion that the grant, the existing grant, would stop.
Enough on that? No, George has another one.