If NICIL is above board why not make its finances public?

May 23, 2012 Letters

Dear Editor,
In your May 21 news article, “AG challenges Opposition to move to courts on NICIL,” I think the parliamentary opposition should be prepared to counter Attorney General Anil Nandlall’s challenge, because NICIL’s Executive Director is first supposed to appear before Parliament – the nation’s highest decision making forum – to answer some serious questions about NICIL’s operations and finances.
I am not sure if the AG is looking to pull a Henry Greene here by asking the court to block Parliament from calling on NICIL’s Executive Director to appear before Parliament, or to block Parliament from taking NICIL to court, but let the records show that Mr. Brassington offered to debate with the AFC’s Khemraj Ramjattan on TV about NICIL. So there is no legal barrier to NICIL’s books being made public, whether in the legislative or the judicial branch.
In the above-mentioned news item, the AG said, “We must understand what NICIL is; NICIL is a company formed under the PNC administration,” and that the “objectives of NICIL are set out in the articles of incorporation…There are a number of objectives that NICIL was established to achieve.” But then he stopped short of telling us what exactly NICIL’s objectives are.
Public information says NICIL was established in July 1990 by the Hoyte administration at a time when the administration was divesting itself of commercial businesses, contradicting today’s interpretation that NICIL is also in the business of investing in more businesses.
Matter of fact, President Bharrat Jagdeo appeared to follow in Hoyte’s footsteps of ending Government’s involvement in commercial business when he addressed Banks DIH’s 50th anniversary celebrations on Friday, September 9, 2005.
Here is part of what he said, “… The Government cannot deliver economic growth; it can only create the enabling environment, and give targeted support where appropriate. The other piece of the equation is a modern and vigorous private sector.
“For too long in Guyana, we had a situation where the Government involved itself in almost all economic activities, and we continue to suffer from the damage caused by this bankrupt and arrogant approach.
“No Government I lead will ever allow this country to return to the days where the Government tried to be all things to all people, and in so doing sapped the spirit of entrepreneurship throughout the country. But this means that the Private Sector must rise to the challenge of being the driver of enhanced competitiveness and greater economic growth. This means demonstrating vision and leadership to create a new entrepreneurial culture, and seizing market opportunities that present themselves…”
So there we have it, straight from the horse’s mouth, so to speak, and which is why this whole notion of NICIL being involved in making investments runs counter to the spirit and purpose of state divestments.
Mr. Nandlall then asked, “When Mr. Carl Greendige was the Finance Minister, did he pay any money from NICIL into the Consolidated Fund? He should be asked why.” While I will let Mr. Greenidge answer that question and also whether NICIL was established to divest and invest, can the AG to tell us since NICIL was set up in July 1990 and the Hoyte administration demitted office in October 1992, just how many state entities were sold off during that 15-month period?
And for all his amateurish defense of NICIL’s right to keep proceeds from its sales while paying dividends to the Consolidated Fund, AG Nandlall has not once addressed the fact that the last fiscal year NICIL filed its annual account was for 2003.
He also has failed to address the fact that in 2003, NICIL earned $29B, paid $9B in dividends and currently has $700M in investments, but no one knows where the remaining GY$19.3B is. He knows everything else except these important factual figures!
Article 216 specifically states that all revenue generating state agencies must turn over revenues to the Consolidated Fund, with the exception of agencies retaining some amounts of monies to defray expenses. If NICIL was established by the government, it is a state agency. If it is using state assets to generate revenue, then it must comply with Article 216. And even if it seeks to retain some of its revenue to defray expenses, does it need GY$19.3B to do that?
I have a growing suspicion that all this push back from the political cabal against efforts to have NICIL’s books made public could be based on the fact that a significant amount of NICIL’s revenues is missing and cannot be properly accounted for.
All this talk about how NICIL is a private company and does not have to turn over its revenues to the Consolidated Fund could well be a strenuous effort to block Parliament from discovering the truth about NICIL’s finances.
The next few weeks could be very interesting as pressure mounts for Mr. Brassington to come clean about NICIL’s finances, but if we see the government pulls a Henry Greene by asking the court to block Parliament from investigating NICIL, or to block Parliament from taking NICIL to court, then we can conclude that billions of dollars have been misappropriated. Or else why wouldn’t the government let NICIL show its books to the public?
Meanwhile, Parliament remains the highest decision-making forum in the land, and if the state-owned NICIL is not subjected to Parliament, then it is a rogue company abusing public assets and finances. It may well be functioning as a parallel government and treasury to the legally recognized ones, but this confounded nonsense has to stop immediately!
Emile Mervin