CL Financial bailout – Call for Order

The CL Financial bailout continues to be a major failure on any scale, both in the causes of the fiasco and especially the manner in which it has been handled.

This is my update on what has been the progress in this campaign.

The equation for our reality check is –

Expenditure of Public Money
Minus            Transparency
Minus            Accountability
Equals           CORRUPTION

In May 2009, I wrote that the Directors and Officers of the CL Financial group should be required to file declarations under the provisions of the Integrity in Public Life Act (IPLA).

According to the IPLA, the Schedule detailing those persons is at page 31 – one of the classes of person required to file declarations to the Integrity Commission is –

“Members of the Boards of all Statutory Bodies and State Enterprises including those bodies in which the State has a controlling interest.”

I have put the last part of the sentence in italics to emphasize the deliberate choice of language by the legislators.  The drafting of legislation is a painstaking exercise of strategy, debate and sometimes compromise…my point being that the inclusion of that last phrase must mean that the legislators intended to go beyond merely saying ‘Statutory Bodies and State Enterprises’, which would be the obvious, to specify that the IPLA must also apply in situations where the State has a controlling interest.

The CL Financial Shareholders Agreement (the Agreement), of 12 June 2009, which I obtained by using the Freedom of Information Act, specifies at clause 3.1 that the Board of Directors of CLF shall consist of seven Directors, four of which shall be nominated by the Government.  The government has been exercising its rights under this clause, so it is clear that the State’s controlling interest in the CL Financial group is effective.

Quite apart from the four companies named in the bailout Memorandum of Understanding of 30 January 2009 and the Agreement – i.e. CL Financial, CLICO, British American Insurance and Caribbean Money Market Brokers – it is also clear that CL Financial controls the other companies in the group.  This effective State control therefore extends to include enterprises which are majority-owned by CL Financial, such as Home Construction Limited, Angostura Holdings Limited, Republic Bank Limited and Methanol Holdings Trinidad Limited.

This very issue of the meaning of the IPLA in relation to state-controlled companies was ruled upon by the High Court in HCA1735 of 2005, in which one of the two issues being determined was –

“…(2) What is the meaning of the expression “Members of the Boards of all Statutory Bodies and State Enterprises including those bodies in which the State has a controlling interest” in paragraph 9 of the Schedule to the Integrity in Public Life Act as amended?…”

The written judgment of Justice Judith Jones  states in its conclusion –


248. In my opinion therefore the words “Members of the Boards of all Statutory Bodies and State Enterprises including those bodies in which the State has a controlling interest” as found in the Act must be taken to mean:
‘the members of the management or decision making body of:

  1. all organisations or bodies established by Statute;
  2. all businesses or companies controlled by or on behalf of the State’.

249. Further for the purpose of determining control by or on behalf of the State a business or company shall be taken to be controlled by the State if the State exercises or is entitled to exercise control directly or indirectly over its affairs; if the State is entitled to appoint a majority of the directors of the Board of Directors or holds at least fifty percent of the capital of that body.

250. This interpretation to my mind is in accord with the purpose and intention of the legislation as expressed by the Constitution and the Act, that is, to preserve and promote the integrity of persons exercising executive or legislative functions on behalf of the State…”

I am advised that TSTT appealed that High Court decision and that judgment is awaited since mid-2010.

I confirmed that key CL Financial Directors have not been filing declarations under the IPLA.  On Monday 10 September, I consulted in person with Integrity Commission staff who confirmed to me that none of these people have filed declarations or been required to file such for 2009, 2010 or 2011 –

  • Gerald Yet Ming (CLF’s current Chairman)
  • Hayden Charles (CLICO Director)
  • Ronald Harford (Republic Bank’s Chairman)
  • Dr Euric Bobb (former CLF Chairman)
  • Rampersad Motilal (Managing Director of Methanol Holdings Limited)

According to the 3 April 2012 affidavit of then Minister of Finance, Winston Dookeran, the public money committed to this colossal bailout is –

Para 21         (a)      $5.0Bn already provided to CLICO;
                (b)      $7.0Bn paid to holders of the EFPA and
Para 22                  $12.0Bn estimated as further funding to be advanced.

That is a total of $24Bn in public money being paid to satisfy the creditors of the CLF group.

I wrote on Monday 10 September to both the Integrity Commission and the Minister of Finance & the Economy to report my serious concerns on this unacceptable state of affairs.  It simply cannot be right that the Directors of this huge state-controlled group are allowed to escape the provisions of the IPLA.  There must be proper transparency in matters of this kind, if good order is to be preserved in our society.

I also made a Freedom of Information application on 8 May 2012  to the Ministry of Finance to get four items which are listed here, along with the Ministry’s replies of 14 August –

  1. CL Financial accounts and if those are not available, the figures on which the Minister of Finance has been relying – The reply is to ask me to provide further information as to what I mean. The Minister of Finance is making analyses and justifying his positions in public, including proposing legislation to Parliament – he must therefore be relying on some figures or estimates to proceed in this way. When I ask for those details, the Finance Ministry is mystified and needs me to explain what I really mean. Just imagine that!
  2. The presentation made to Members of Parliament in September 2011 to brief them prior to the debate on the Central Bank (Amendment) Bill and the Purchase of Certain Rights and Validation Bill 2011– The reply is to claim that the presentation is an exempt document which the Ministry is therefore unable to provide.  The official presentation made to our Members of Parliament in this matter is deemed secret, which seems incompatible with the notion of a free, democratic society, so it will not rest there.
    The recent revelations about the Plot to Pervert Parliament in relation to the S.34 debacle and the way in which the country, its significant institutions and its legislature have been misled for the benefit of political financiers have given me pause.  I am now reflecting that the bailout and shareholders agreement were never debated, they were both declared as fait accompli.  What is more, the new 2011 laws I am writing about here have a similar flavour of Abuse of Office in that we are being told that the contents of that presentation to Members of Parliament are secret.  The S.34 fiasco involved an alleged stealing of $1Bn in Public Money and we are all now seeing the extent to which these white-collar criminals and their servants will go to cover their tracks.  It is truly revolting.  So, the question is ‘‘Given what we now know and the fact that the CLF bailout involves many billions of dollars in Public Money, is it reasonable to assume that our Parliamentarians and Public Officials will be responsible and honest in their dealings?’ I will be returning to this, it is turning in my mind.
  3. Details on the composition of the creditors of the CL Financial group, in particular EFPA holders.  I was asking who was owed money and who got paid.  That is at the centre of this issue – The reply states that the information requested is likely to be exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.  That is another aspect of this to be challenged.
  4. Declarations filed by Directors and Officers of the CL Financial group under the IPLA – The reply points out that those declarations are secret, which is correct, but also goes on to state that this is not to be construed as an admission or denial that the IPLA applies to those Directors and Officers.  Well I tell you.

The region’s largest privately-held group of companies is now under State control, in a situation of huge insolvency, with no proper accounts and no declarations being filed by the Directors.

It is as if the sheer size and power of this CL Financial event is warping all the usual rules – like a black hole or anti-matter – to the extent that it seems like the Freedom of Information Act is now being used for the Incarceration of Information!

This development is a serious peril to our Treasury.  It must be a matter of the gravest possible concern to all right-thinking people that our fundamental Integrity safeguards appear to have been circumvented or ignored in a matter of this size and consequence.


7 thoughts on “CL Financial bailout – Call for Order

  1. So basically this government not making a move to secure the state’s interest in any way.This CLICO bailout becoming a proper fiasco,but quietly so. And in the mean time fraud and corruption continues being the order of the day with big business.

  2. Hello Rhoda, this is an epic scandal and as I have been saying, it is the largest single episode of corruption in the region’s history.

    I am going to start writing about the Plot to Pervert Parliament as a new item in our lexicon…we need to continue sloganeering!



  3. I recommend that we, the public, stop paying state taxes, insurance premiums and any bills and fines including WASA, TSTT, T&TEC since no declaration of intent or explanation is necessary from those who lead us. We can live quite comfortably off the royalties from gas and oil and let the state worry about the rest. “If de priest could play, who is we?” That quote is about an Anglican priest, Father Clifford Hendey who played mas in 1966 and the Mighty Cypher won the crown in 1967 with a tune of that name. I am quite sure that the silent will suddenly explain loudly why these acts would sabotage the economy despite the fact that sabotage is being practiced against taxpayers whose silence legitimises its continuance.

    It is only when the masses rebel that those in authority heed to a modicum of common sense. Academics and middle-class thinkers have more bark than bite but the masses can bite. They cannot lock us all up and it will cost them to feed us too. If we respond by blocking the streets and preventing commerce from pillaging, its chamber will voice eloquently its objections and may have to cancel at least one round of golf, cancel one overseas trip….
    Action begets action.

  4. Mr. Raymond,
    I believe that you are an intelligent man. So it makes me wonder why you would quote Mr.Dookeran as saying that $24 billion in public funds had been spent to pay off CLICO creditors. You can’t possibly believe that statement as an intelligent person. Mr. Dookeran himself stated that CLICO had liabilities of $23 billion and assets of $16 billion, a short fall of $7 billion. If you assume that $5 billion had already been advanced to CLICO at that point then it would require a total of$12 billion to balance their books so why in the world would the government expend $24 billion and still policyholders not getting all of their money. Why wouldn’t you question that statement by Mr.Dookeran. Seems a little strange.

    1. Hello Colum,

      Thanks for engaging me on these points, even in the midst of the festive season.

      I was citing Dookeran’s affidavit as to monies spent or anticipated to be spent on CLICO’s creditors, which in fact seem to conflict with the figures repeatedly stated elsewhere for CL Financial. I believe that the figures in that Dookeran affidavit of 3rd April 2012 are in fact CLF figures. There is persistent confusion over the fact that CLICO is a subsidiary of CLF, a large one, but still only a subsidiary. That is evident in statements from several of the leading spokespersons, up to and including the various Ministers of Finance.

      Also, please note that the substance of the ‘Call for Order’ is contained in my Freedom of Information application to the Ministry of Finance on 8th May 2012. I am in fact robustly interrogating the substance of the arrangements…it is simply not true to say that I have accepted Dookeran’s statement in any way…I am using that statement as a springboard from which to launch my enquiry…

      I hope you can join-in again…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.