kicked off debate in the House of Assembly on the Auditor General?s report on the Bermuda Housing Corporation by declaring that troubled quango had been given a clean bill of health.

?The BHC is one of the most important social institutions,? the Premier said, adding that the future of BHC looked honest and bright.

?Be assured this Government welcomes the scrutiny such an audit may bring by way of vindicating innocent BHC staff,? he quoted former Premier Jennifer Smith to say. He said Ms Smith asked the Auditor General in early 2002, to look into BHC?s financial state.

?I stand here today to set the record straight,? he said. ?I?m back. No more Mr. Nice-guy?.

He said the matter was turned over to Police, who ?found nothing?.

When the opposition shouted out that someone had been charged by Police, Mr. Scott said he was ?not a member of Government?.

Mr. Scott read a potion of the Auditor?s report which said that because of inefficiencies inside BHC, ?kickbacks? could occur and remain largely undetected.

?We didn?t duck our responsibility,? he said. ?Was there something wrong? Yes! Have we fixed it? Yes!?

He said a new system of checks and balances were now in place to make sure the ?problems of the past? are never repeated.

?There will be no giving contracts to the boys, if that was the case,? he said. ?There is now a very rigorous test prospective contractors are put through.?

The Premier accused the Opposition of trying to stretch the issue out, no matter how much damage was done to BHC staff who were innocent of corruption.

There will be new procedures for procuring goods and services, he said. Verbal quotes are now acceptable only for goods less than $1,500.

And BHC staff have stricter environmental controls.

Line Officers can spend a maximum of $3,000, but Department Managers must not exceed spending of $10,000.

?The General Manager and Financial Manager are limited to expenses of $120,000,? he said. ?Expenditures over $120,000 but less than $200,000 must be agreed by the Chair and Deputy Chair of the BHC Board.?

Expenses over $200,000 requires the consent of the entire BHC Board, he said.

He said all purchase books will be numbers and secured and will not be allowed out of BHC Head Office. In the past BHC was spilt into five departments: rental, maintenance, financial, support services and mortgages.

These five departments have been reduced to three.

He admitted that the Auditor General could not sign off on the 2002 financial records of the BHC because he ?didn?t trust it? but he assured the House that everything in BHC was now in good working order.

?BHC is getting its house back in order,? he said.

However, said the Auditor found few if any problems with BHC from 1980 to 1998, the quangos first 18 years ? and all under his UBP.

?I say Vance Campbell pulled BHC out of the big ditch he found it in,? Mr. Furbert said, adding that the Housing Minister of the time should apologise.

?I know they would like the voters to forget,? he said. ?But I am sure the young mothers living in cars and the families not able to afford affordable rent will not forget. If BHC had delivered on its mission during that period of time, these individuals will be well housed in 2005.?

Something fundamental went wrong in BHC after 1998, he said. He reminded the House that Shadow MP Michael Dunkley stood up on March 4, 2002 and called BHC ?the Enron of Bermuda?.

?Can you imagine what would be going on there now if we left it then?? he asked.

Premier Scott took to his feet, with an ?point of order? to say: ?There was no proof of any kickbacks?.

?Why isn?t anyone in court?? Mr. Scott continued. ?Scotland Yard didn?t see it.?

But Mr. Furbert said everything in BHC was just ?grab and go?.

He said it was possible for BHC staff to steal $50,000 if BHC was charged $450,000 for a home that only took $400,000 to build.

BHC staff were able to approve work, write purchase orders and write cheques.

The Auditor found that money had been spent for debts, divorces and tuition fees, he said.

?The Corporation has policies that satisfies criteria, but the problem is they rarely follow them,? he said.

Projects estimated to cost $390,000 ended up costing $740,000, he said.

He said price-differences between quotes and paid prices range from 32 percent to 200 percent. ?It is important what took place never happen again,? he said.