Social Support Agency Grants Taken to Parliament as Auditor General Withholds Donor Names and Amounts

Lawmakers were presented only with sponsor logos, not a named list with figures, as scrutiny intensifies following the Videogate fallout and the resignation of First Lady Philippa Karsera.

Header Image

The Social Support Agency has moved to the centre of parliamentary and public scrutiny, as the Auditor General declined to submit a named list of donors and the amounts contributed. The development comes amid heightened pressure for transparency following the Videogate affair and the resignation of First Lady Philippa Karsera from the Agency’s management committee last week.

What Was Submitted to Parliament

The Auditor General of the Republic, Andreas Antoniadis, ultimately did not provide MPs with the detailed donor register they had requested during today’s session of the House Committee on Institutions.

Instead of names and specific figures, the material sent to Parliament contained only the logos of sponsors, without any reference to the sums contributed by each donor.

Political Context and Pressure

The Social Support Agency has been under intense public debate since the emergence of the so called Videogate scandal. The episode triggered strong political and social calls for transparency and accountability in the Agency’s operations, culminating in Ms Karsera’s resignation from the presidency of its management committee.

What the Auditor General Said

It is recalled that, when asked yesterday by Politis whether he intended to submit the full named list of donors to Parliament, as requested by MPs, Mr Antoniadis, who also serves as the Agency’s treasurer, replied verbatim: “Any information will be submitted.”

For now, however, lawmakers remain without the detailed breakdown they were expecting, as calls for full disclosure continue to dominate the discussion around the Agency’s governance and funding.

 

Comments Posting Policy

The owners of the website www.politis.com.cy reserve the right to remove reader comments that are defamatory and/or offensive, or comments that could be interpreted as inciting hate/racism or that violate any other legislation. The authors of these comments are personally responsible for their publication. If a reader/commenter whose comment is removed believes that they have evidence proving the accuracy of its content, they can send it to the website address for review. We encourage our readers to report/flag comments that they believe violate the above rules. Comments that contain URLs/links to any site are not published automatically.