Dear Editor,
Within the past week the controversy surrounding the NICIL finances deepened with the key NICIL Board members refusing to appoint an independent auditor to review the books. Their language and tone speak of a determined attempt to shroud NICIL’s financial activities in secrecy as if NICIL is a family heirloom. Why this secrecy over taxpayers’ money?
To further complicate matters, the Attorney General’s attempt to defend the alleged conflict of interest and insider dealing on the Brassington-Hand-in-Hand Trust Company deal is highly unethical, inappropriate and untenable with respect to good governance. It is clear that many people have to have a re-look at their roles vis-à-vis the preservation of the state.
What is at stake here is how a lead government negotiator on all the privatization deals during the last decade, used his position of influence to dig one financial hole to fill another, leaving the taxpayers with a deep financial hole in their pocket. Why was GNCB Trust sold if the taxpayers were going to be saddled with an exorbitant toll rate to cross the Berbice River Bridge to fund the bail out of this business after the failed Stanford-Hand-in-Hand deal?
Would it not be better to have taxpayers fund their own self-enrichment rather than a private company and now a close related party of the NICIL Board in the form of Jonathan Brassington? After the Stanford-Hand-in-Hand failed deal, no sane business person would have wanted to be within a mile of that company, so what was the incentive for this, if not for the 20 year guaranteed cash flow from the Berbice River Bridge, compliments of the taxpayers, especially those Berbicians who have to cross the bridge several times a week.
As the NICIL Board is in the habit of running in front of the TV to defend the indefensible we would like them to do the following:
1. Reveal the evidence to demonstrate the justification for privatising a profitable cash cow (GNCB Trust) in the first place? Why privatise GNCB Trust not GUYOIL, another cash cow (which we were reliably informed transferred close to $3 billion to NICIL in the last financial year). So much for NICIL‘s claims that they have only $700 million in cash.
2. Who made the call to re-invest in this company and sanctioned the unethical decision to allow the lead negotiator (Winston Brassington) to sign as a power of attorney on a private deal with a party for which he was a lead negotiator on a similardeal with the said Hand-in-Hand Insurance? Was such action in the best interest of his final master – the taxpayers? Couldn’t Mr Jonathan Brassington pay a first class fare to transfer $225 million to Hand-in-Hand?
The fact that there is a culture of secrecy surrounding NICIL finances suggests that things have gone terribly wrong, but we are convinced that as time goes by the incestuous related party transactions will reveal themselves. It is critical that the majority opposition, especially the AFC, bring to the agenda of the tripartite meeting the dealings of NICIL over the last decade.
We believe that the Public Accounts Committee must call for an independent forensic audit of the financial activities of NICIL over the last decade. In this scenario the Office of the Auditor General cannot be deemed as independent since there remains an unresolved conflict of interest between the Chairman of NICIL and the Audit Office. The findings from that audit must serve as the base to take whatever action is deemed necessary.
In conclusion, our only interest in this matter is that we find it grossly unfair to the working people and pensioners of Guyana that billions of dollars were paid out by NICIL instead of seeking the taxpayers‘ permission by way of the Parliament to invest those funds in sound deals to benefit the people. During the orchestrated NCN TV debate, the Minister of Finance, Dr Ashni Singh and the Director of NICIL, Mr Winston Brassington did not provide documentary evidence to the nation on the following:
1. how much money NICIL had in the bank as at the end of April 2012;
2. the details of how much NICIL received in privatisation proceeds from 2001-2011 and the financial justification behind each and every privatisation deal;
3. the details of how much NICIL received in dividends from its investments between 2001-2011. We were reliably told that NICIL received several billions from GUYOIL within the last 12 months.
4. the details of how much NICIL received in income from the sale of lands and other divestments from 2001-2011?
5. when the draft accounts for NICIL for the year 2005-2011 will be released for parliamentary consumption.
We implore President Ramotar to use the good will of his office to cease the propaganda spread by the PPP and some NICIL Board members, and urge those responsible for NICIL’s debacle to tell the nation the truth. It is not enough for the government to profess its help for the poor and the working class, but at the same time not recognize that the actions of NICIL could bring more hardship and pain for the working class. We affirm that the sacred duty of the government is to be the servants of the people and be accountable to them. Does the Ramotar administration believe in this concept?
Yours faithfully,
Asquith Rose
Sasenarine Singh
