We will begin the report with a response released by Gilad Erdan, who faced the media on Tuesday afternoon 28 Shevat 5775 after State Comptroller Yosef Shapira released his official report citing major overspending by the Prime Minister’s Residence.

Erdan made excellent points, some to be included later in this article, some to appear later in this report, but perhaps the most significant was missed as Channel 2 News’ anchorwoman Yonit Levy did her best to stifle Erdan’s remarks.

Erdan simply asked a few questions, perhaps questions that should be asked by any Israeli reading the report.

1. Why such a report was never compiled on any other prime minister?

2. The report sites amounts but gives no basis for comparison. Bottom line, how does the public know what expenses are or are not reasonable since there is no budget of comparison to expenses from any previous administrations.

3. Why is the fact that the same report cites the budget for the President’s Residence is 40 million NIS annually yet President Shimon Peres spent 60 million NIS but no one is commenting.

Erdan adds that the prime minister “is always on call and never stops working” and as a result, entertains officials and state leaders in both residences and this demands a certain level that costs money.

He cites one example to highlight the fact that Mr. Netanyahu is being targeted, the “ridiculous case” in his words of the investigation into allegations that Mrs. Sara Netanyahu returns bottles from the PM’s Residence to receive the deposit money and pockets that sum. He stated to think in terms of 30 agorot per bottle that the prime minister’s wife allegedly pockets should speak volumes.

This is sufficient to give any intelligence reader sufficient information to realize the report, and the timing of its release, about a month before national elections, are not matters of coincidence. That is not to say there is or is not excessive spending at the Prime Minister’s Residence, but it does show that Mr. Netanyahu is being singled out.

Some Numbers for Comparison

In 2009, the Prime Minister’s Office spent 1.8 million. The President’s Residence spent 44.8 million.

2010: PM: 2.4 million & President: 46.4 million

2011: PM: 3.1 million & President: 51.3 million

2012: PM: 2.8 million & President: 55.3 million

2013: PM: 2.4 million & President: 50.2 million

One might scratch one’s head and ask why no one seems interested in the President’s Residence, which clearly uses a greater chunk of taxpayer revenue.

The state comptroller also points out, as was cited by Erdan, that after the state comptroller expressed criticism over the high spending in the PM’s Residence back in 2011, Mr. Netanyahu gave the order to cut spending and annual spending remains on a downward trend.

One example cited was the amount spent for cleaning in the Netanyahu family home in Caesarea, which is maintained by the state as they are usually in that home on weekends. Erdan reported that there is a fulltime cleaning person on staff who earns about 8,000 NIS monthly, an “average” Israeli salary, and that is how the annual cleaning bill hit almost 90,000 NIS. He questions if a one-person cleaning staff is excessive.

In his column in the daily Maariv, Kalman Lipskind points out that regarding the cleaning bill, readers haven’t a clue how must it costs to maintain a building the size of the PM’s residence of the family villa in Caesarea, accusing Shapira of directing the national agenda against the Netanyahus when we have no basis for comparison whatsoever.

Some experts, who are not politically motivated, point out that the prime minister himself has next to nothing to do with the operations of either residence, as he is obviously busy running the country. They explain that even if spending is out of hand, to point a finger of blame at the prime minister is absurd since he does not concern himself with takeout food orders, cleaning staff or the many other expenses detailed in the damaging report.

·       All sums are in new Israeli shekels

Erdan’s Response

Erdan continued, explaining much of the facts in the report presented by Shapira are not based on firsthand information but on information from other sources.

Electrician Avi Fachima is mentioned in the report. He was hired to work in the Netanyahu home in Caesarea and was instructed to work on weekends, including Shabbos and Yomtov. According to the comptroller, he also worked Yom Kippur. Some of the problems surrounding his employment pointed out in the report is that he was a member of the Likud Central Committee and there is a conflict of interests. Fachima, from Ohr Akiva, also hosted the Netanyahu family for a Maimouna feast in 2010, so there is a friendship between them. The comptroller explains he cannot be certain regarding sums paid to Fachima since he was ordered directly by Mrs. Netanyahu and employed on weekends, thereby bypassing official channels.

Erdan explains that Fachima is not a member of the Central Committee and that he never worked on Yom Kippur and never on Shabbos barring emergencies warranting this.

This and other components of the report are already on the desk of Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein, and some experts feel that the hiring of the family electrician may represent law-breaking and result in criminal charges. Once again, Erdan points out the timing of the release of the report.

Erdan also explained that once Mr. Netanyahu dismissed Meni Naftali as the person in charge of running affairs, expenses dropped considerably, placing the blame for excessive spending on his unprofessional performance. He adds that Naftali did not leave happily and much of the disinformation contained in the report came from him, the disgruntled former employee.

The attorney general is probing the report and it is entirely possible that the unfavorable report will lead to a criminal investigation.

The Prime Minister’s Office Responds

The Prime Minister’s Office will work to implement the recommendations in the State Comptroller’s report in continuation of the actions that have already been taken and which were noted in the report.

The Prime Minister’s Office points out that approximately two years ago Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered that steps be taken to reduce expenditures at his residences and that subsequently there was a significant drop in expenditures as noted in the State Comptroller’s report.

The President’s Residence Responds

Officials in the President’s Residence are angry over efforts to compare the two offices. They explain the President’s Residence hosts guests, state and international officials and is the venue for many ceremonies, almost on a daily basis. The same cannot be said for the PM’s office.

That said, the state comptroller was critical of the President’s Residence as well, citing shortcomings in overall operations in management, personnel, money, planning and property.

Likud Party Responds

The Likud Issued the Following Statement in Response to the Comptroller’s Report:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu respects the findings released in the Comptroller’s report in relation to all the matters which were investigated. A large portion of the recommendations in the report were implemented even prior to its release. The Prime Minister has issued a directive to implement the remaining recommendations in the best and most effective manner possible.

To our sincere regret, the ongoing media campaign which has surrounded this issue for weeks in advance of the report’s release, was a clear effort to remove the Prime Minister from office and the Likud from leadership through a focus on irrelevant minutia and distract from the real issues at hand: Who will defend the State of Israel in the face of the real security threats and pressure from the international community- Binyamin Netanyahu or Buji (Yitzchak Herzog) and Tzipi [Livni]?

Fact: Among the items that were investigated in the Comptroller’s report, there is absolutely no indication of any assault on the public’s integrity and certainly no indication of any criminal transgressions.

The introductory portion of the report, not part of the official record, includes reference to inconsequential matters regarding the recycling of bottles and patio furniture. These issues were not investigated by the Comptroller and neither the Prime Minister nor the Prime Minister’s Office received any official request for clarification pertaining to these matters. Therefore no opportunity was afforded to offer an official response.

The report does not offer any comparisons to other official residences in Israel. This creates a significant problem is effectively establishing a proper benchmark for analysis because expenses of an official residence cannot be compared to that of a private home. For example, expenses of the President’s Residence are many tens of times higher than those of the Prime Minister’s Residence. Regarding the President’s Residence, the report does not address the budget breakdown or address specific details. Therefore, there is no basis for comparison which would allow the public to effectively evaluate what are acceptable benchmarks.

It is important to note the expenses of the Prime Minister’s residence have been reduced significantly over the past two years. The expenses significantly increased during a specific period of time when the house’s maintenance and operation were directed by Mr. Meni Naftali – an embittered former public employee. Mr. Naftali is currently leading a campaign of slander and defamation against the Prime Minister with the specific goal of illegitimately leveraging his claim for financial gain from the State coffers and to damage the Prime Minister and the Likud party during this period of Knesset elections.

The expenses of the Prime Minister’s residence were reduced significantly following Mr. Naftali’s departure from his former position.

(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)