The disclosure of Cabinet ministers' travel expenses is “incomplete and inaccurate”, with some claims not “appropriate or adequately supported” by receipts, according to the Auditor-General.

Heather Thomas tabled a report in the House of Assembly yesterday which scrutinised the public reporting of ministerial travel, meal and hospitality expenses by six public authorities, including the Ministry of Finance and the Cabinet Office and Digital Innovation, which houses the Office of the Premier.

Ms Thomas found that thousands of dollars worth of expenses for 2023 and 2024 were not disclosed on the Government’s travel calendar website and that hundreds of transactions lacked supporting receipts.

The Auditor-General concluded: “There could be a risk that the public coffer could be subsidising travel expenses that should be reimbursed by the traveller or not related to Government of Bermuda business.”

Ms Thomas also flagged up a failure by the Government to publicly disclose expenses for public servants travelling with ministers on overseas trips.

A parliamentary answer to a written Opposition question on that topic in September stated that “recent convention regarding expenses for public officers accompanying ministers on official travel overseas has been that such expenses would not be subject to parliamentary questions”.

However, the Government said in response last night that Ms Thomas’s suggestions had been taken on board.

Ms Thomas said in a statement yesterday that the public “may want to ask” why the costs of all ministerial business travel, including of accompanying delegations, are not fully disclosed to the public and what “consequences or corrective actions are in place for public officers and ministers who fail to comply with government policies” on expenses.

She added: “While the disclosure of ministerial travel expenses is not mandated by law, publishing this information demonstrates respect for public funds, fiscal responsibility and accountability.

“Transparency in the use of government resources — particularly for travel — is best practice and the public have the right to know.”

She wrote in her report that there was room for improvement for the six public authorities in the study and recommended that all other ministries “review their internal systems and protocols”.

The other four public authorities included in the Auditor-General’s study, which reviewed 72 ministerial trips in 2023 and 2024 costing $348,157 and involving 1,077 transactions, were the ministries of transport; home affairs; economy and labour; and tourism, culture and sport.

The report’s findings included that:

• Almost $55,000 worth of travel expenses for 2023 and 2024 was not disclosed to the public

• Of that, more than $8,000 worth of travel was paid for but not taken, including now-expired credits worth $6,783

• $301,610 worth of expenses was disclosed on the travel calendar website

• 101 — or 22 per cent — of the 464 transactions in 2024 lacked supporting receipts

• Of those 101 transactions, 66 involved expenses worth more than $20, totalling $16,025. The 66 transactions included 35 by the Ministry of Tourism, Transport, Culture and Sport and 13 by the Ministry of Finance

• 103 — or 17 per cent — of the 613 transactions in 2023 lacked supporting receipts

• Of those 103 transactions, 53 involved expenses worth more than $20, totalling $13,107. The 53 transactions included 17 by the Cabinet Office and 12 by the Ministry of Finance

• Hundreds of travel expenses in 2023 and 2024 were not processed within 30 days of the charge, as they should be per official financial instructions, costing taxpayers $6,401 in finance charges.

Ms Thomas noted that the Government “proactively” disclosed ministers' expenses on the travel calendar, even though there was no legislative requirement to do so, but she found there was no “thorough and central record of overseas travel at public expense”.

She stated in her report that there was “incomplete and inaccurate public disclosure on the travel webpage, resulting from the [six] ministries’ supporting documentation being incomplete”.

Ms Thomas added: “Overseas travel expenses claims were not all appropriate and adequately supported.”

Ms Thomas wrote that the ministerial code of conduct set out the “principles, rules [and] responsibilities” surrounding overseas visits but enforcement varied, depending on the public authority.

She pointed out that the code specified that ministries should prepare a record of ministerial travel containing the “numbers and costs of all ministerial delegations whose travel has been at the public expense”.

She recommended that the “full costs of ministerial delegations” be included in future public disclosures on the travel calendar website.

The Auditor-General recommended setting up a standardised reporting system with “clear guidelines for all ministries” and the strengthening of internal controls and training of public officers and ministers.

She suggested in her statement that the public might also want to ask to what extent they expect or require detailed reporting on the use of public funds by elected officials and whether there would be more accountability if each ministry was required to publish a formal annual audited report summarising all ministerial travel expenses.

• To read the Auditor-General’s report, see Related Media

Download PDF File

Report on Ministerial Travel.pdf