PARLIAMENT'S ETHICS committee will on Tuesday consider whether Minister of Finance and the Public Service Audley Shaw or Central Manchester Member of Parliament (MP) Peter Bunting misled the House.

The neighbouring MPs, who sit on either side of the political divide, have accused each other of presenting Parliament with misleading statements regarding deals struck between the Government and Dehring Bunting and Golding Limited (DB&G), a company for which Bunting was a director.

'Sweetheart deals'

Shaw represents North East Manchester and is a member of the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP). In closing the 2008-2009 Budget Debate last month, he said DB&G benefited from "sweetheart deals" in the sale of assets acquired by the Financial Sector Adjustment Company (FINSAC).

The People's National Party (PNP), for which Bunting is now general secretary, held state power at the time when DB&G was engaged by government to sell receivables on its behalf. Bunting was at that time not an active member of the PNP.

On Tuesday, Bunting sought to defend his integrity and presented his side of the story in Parliament, stating he would not seek further sanctions if Shaw withdrew his statement.

Bunting said Shaw had misled the House and breached Parliament's Standing Orders, which state that "no member shall impute improper motives to any other member of either Chamber".

'No such thing'

Bunting charged that one of the so-called sweetheart deals which Shaw spoke about did not take place.

"One of those two examples was a supposed sale by the Government of cash flows owing by the Jamaica Redevelopment Foundation. The minister embarked upon a description of the supposed transaction in considerable detail," Bunting said.

"The fact is that no such transaction ever took place, DB&G did communicate with the Government about the potential benefits of a transaction arising from the Government's ongoing dealings with the Jamaica Redevelopment Foundation. However, those discussions did not lead to any form of transaction," the Central Manchester MP told Parliament.

Yesterday, however, Shaw presented Parliament with what he termed seven exhibits proving the transaction took place.

"I trust that the House will consider what measures should be applied to purge the member of his wilful misleading of this honourable House," Shaw argued.

But during a press conference called while the House was still sitting, Bunting told journalists the documentation presented by Shaw represented a short-term bridging facility.

He said this was facilitated because the original transaction did not occur.