Former Cabinet Secretary Marc Telemaque yesterday hit back at criticism of the controversial emissions testing programme, saying much of the extra cash spent on the project was supported by the House of Assembly.Mr Telemaque has been in the spotlight for disregarding a Cabinet decision that the Tourism and Transport project should be put out to tender instead of handed to Bermuda Emissions Control.Yesterday, the civil servant took the ‘unprecedented' step of defending himself in response to a damning report from the Public Accounts Committee which has prompted Premier Paula Cox to say she may set up an independent investigation.Mr Telemaque, who was previously questioned over the subject at a public PAC meeting, said he had been unfairly exposed as a civil servant while other people did their interviews away from the glare of the media. While the cost jumped from an initial $5.3 million to $15.2 million, Mr Telemaque said much of that was approved by MPs in Budget debates.Mr Telemaque said in a statement: “In the absence of any defence of me, as a senior civil servant, by others I shall defend myself. This unprecedented trend of attacking civil servants requires an equally unprecedented public response. The Public Accounts Committee's lack of power to examine Ministers does too often lead them to take aim at the next available target.“I have read the report of the Public Accounts Committee on the Motor Vehicle Safety and Emissions Testing Programme and in my view it does not give a fair account of the actions taken to complete this project.“The report does, however, at least attempt to get its numbers right in citing the actual overspend on the project as $983,000 and not $10 million as alluded to previously and ultimately figuring in media reports.”He said the capital expenditure estimates had been tabled in four successive years, indicating that the cost of the project was rising to $14.25 million.“At no stage in any of those debates did anyone in the legislature take issue with the increasing Total Allocated Funding or its obvious effect on the capital estimates,” he said.“The Budgets for each of those four years were approved each and every year by Parliament.“The suggestion that the project ballooned out of control with respect to costs is not accurate and cannot be said to be so when for four years its increases in projected costs were declared openly and fully in a public document debated over several weeks in both Houses of the legislature.“At no stage has anybody examining this project or commenting on it taken account of the obvious changes in design, scope and functionality which account for the variances in costs.”Last Friday's PAC report described former Premier Ewart Brown's Ministry of Tourism and Transport as a ‘Government within a Government', noting that unlike other Ministries it didn't have to operate under the supervision of Works and Engineering; Governor Sir Richard Gozney has praised Ms Cox for removing a culture of ‘special concessions' awarded to Dr Brown's former Ministry.Mr Telemaque, who was Tourism and Transport Permanent Secretary but now has that role within the Ministry of National Security, said: “The suggestion of a ‘Government within a Government' being run by the Ministry of Tourism and Transport is inaccurate.”He explained the project spanned three administrations, three Permanent Secretaries and two directors.He said it took nine years to get off the ground because of red tape including getting Cabinet approval and sign-off by Ministers as required, changes to account for environmental factors raised often at the last minute, and persistent and detailed reviews of contracts and agreements. Further delays arose, he said, because of “an inability by various Cabinets” to decide on the method of build: public-private-partnership, or build then buy, or Government-funded build and operating agreement.Mr Telemaque's other criticisms of the report were:n it failed to highlight that a member of the Auditor General's team confirmed in the public hearing that there was architectural sign-off for the main TCD building and that their issue was with the satellite testing facilities and the nature of the approval for payments at that point;n the assertion that a previous Cabinet conclusion was used as ‘cover' for someone's actions is inaccurate and imparts a sinister intent where there is none;n “at no stage did I tell the Accountant General to ‘just make it happen' in relation to this project although the report now alleges that this was communicated on my behalf by a subordinate”.He added that the Accountant General was consulted many times, and exercised due diligence and the power of the purse strings to refuse payments when not satisfied with supporting documentation and process.Earlier this year, Auditor General Heather Matthews said Mr Telemaque should be fined for failing to comply with financial rules and not putting the contract out to tender; this was revealed at a PAC meeting, at which Mr Telemaque said he was trying to avoid wasting time.Yesterday, he stated: “Personally, I am disturbed to learn that some persons who testified before the committee and would have had detailed knowledge of the start of this policy were afforded the opportunity to appear in camera, that is, behind closed doors. That option was never afforded to me and the result has been to unfairly expose a civil servant whose work is by definition done in the background to the glare of media attention.“For almost ten years I have given unstintingly of myself to the Public Service, often at the expense of my family. It is grossly unfair to them and it is not reflective of my work ethic to be handled in this way. My job is to serve and to serve well.“That means that every day I am committed to getting things done and I do not believe working in the public service to be an excuse for idleness or sloth.“This report unfairly characterises a project whose delays adversely impacted hard working staff at TCD far too long.“The men and women of that department have transformed its reputation and continue to raise millions of dollars in revenue for the Government every year. The vast majority of people will agree that the TCD of today is a huge difference from the TCD of the past. Public buildings should be functional, good working environments and welcoming to the public whom they serve. This building achieves that.”