Tag: code of silence

BLIND MAN’S BLUFF

“Blind man’s buff  [or Blind man’s bluff] is played in a spacious area, such as outdoors or in a large room, in which one player, designated as “It”, is blindfolded and gropes around attempting to touch the other players without being able to see them, while the other players scatter and try to avoid the person who is “it”, hiding in plain sight and sometimes teasing them to make them change direction.”

Wikipedia contributors, “Blind Man’s buff.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_man%27s_buff  (Accessed October 7, 2012)

In this rounds, we, The Public, are ‘it’…you see?

The entire ‘section 34 fiasco’ is churning in my mind, so I am calling it the Plot to Pervert Parliament.

The way in which the country, its significant institutions and its legislature have been misled for the benefit of political financiers has given me pause.  The entire episode is truly revolting, even for those of us who have little faith in our political rulers.

Having listened to the PM’s address on this S.34 fiasco there are now more questions than answers.  The silence by the PM and other leading MPs on these documented facts during the Parliamentary debate on the repeal seems to amount to a calculated decision to withhold information.

The main questions for the PM are along two limbs –

  1. Firstly, how does the AG’s absence overseas for a few days exonerate him?  We need to stay with this line, given that it is the principal one advanced by the PM after her research into the issue.
  2. Secondly, there is the burning question of what is Volney’s true role in all this?  Did the PM ask him why he misled his Cabinet colleagues and the Parliament?  If so, what did Volney say?  If the PM did not ask Volney for his reasons, one has to be deeply skeptical about the idea that this single Minister outwitted the entire Cabinet.

The fact that this episode centred on the actual 50th Jubilee weekend was a powerful wake-up call to us all.  History is rich in irony.

For my part, there is no way we are lightly ‘moving on’ from this tragic place…this is the occasion to resolve a lot of this nonsense and put us on the road to a much improved system of governance. It is going to be a hard campaign, but we must have a realistic appreciation of our situation if we are to have any chance at prevailing.

After the PP’s election victory, the Steve-Ish issue presented a conundrum since the USA wanted them and the public wanted to see them face justice. The Extradition request was refused so that they can be tried here.  That ruling was not appealed by the AG, who stated that the reason is to allow them to be tried here.

The result of the sudden reversal in the face of mounting protest, is that the Piarco Accused can now say to the Court that Parliament exercised its powers to repeal legislation upon which they were relying to seek freedom.  Parliament acted to reduce the rights of two individuals and the Court may be asked to rule that those actions of the Parliament have oppressed these men.  The recent repeal of this section seems to have fortified the case of the Piarco Accused in seeking freedom.

Sidebar – Was S.34 the first time?

I am now recalling that the CLF bailout and shareholders agreement were never debated, they were both declared as fait accompli.  What is more, as I wrote in this space recently, the Ministry of Finance is claiming that the contents of the presentation to Members of Parliament on the new bailout laws is 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 in good faith 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.

Proper Priorities of our Parliament
Our Parliament has been on holiday since 11 July, but it has been reconvened twice in that period.  The first occasion was in mid-August to satisfy an upcoming evaluation by the Financial Action Task Force of our Financial Intelligence Unit.  All members voted in support of that Bill.  The second occasion was for the repeal of the controversial s.34 and that raised a question for me.  Why did the government agree to reconvene to repeal?  Was it because of our objections and criticisms, or was it the stated concerns of the USA?  In our 50th year of Independence, did the concerns of the USA outweigh our strong concerns?  A sobering reflection.

The Title of this article is a kinda medley, when you study that, in Whe Whe, #34 is ‘Blind Man‘, we have been outwitted.  One of my favourite moves, in those well-plotted spy thrillers, is the ‘Double-Bluff‘…This S.34 episode is a real cynical game of Blind Man’s Bluff….you see?

“…They’ve got 12 Aces up their sleeve!
So who the Hell can we believe?!
Steve?
Not even the love of your children’s enough…
To quell this cynical pain!
Can you show me a directing-sign?
Show me a sign!
On this Highway of Big-Tief and Fools…
You tief yours and I shall tief mine!
Leh we go down the Road an break the broken rules
So in this morning of another day
When decency will lose its way
Ray!
There goes another $100 Million again!
Back to the Same Ole Same!
….
The self-contempt is like a Badge of Hate!
Award yuhself!
It’s not too late!”
© Lypsoland Music. Lyric used by Permission. All Rights Reserved.
From the opening stanza of David Rudder’s ‘Back to the Same Ole Same‘ on the 2001 album ‘Autobiography of Now’

Where do we go from here?  That question is for the second part of this column.

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 –

“…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.

Compliance of CL Financial Directors with the Integrity in Public Life Act

These are my emails to formally raise the issue of the applicability of our Integrity in Public Life Act—which requires Public Officials to file declarations of their interests and assets as an Integrity safeguard—to the Directors of CL Financial.

This is an issue I first wrote on in May 2009 and the questions remained unanswered, so the questions have now been put directly to the relevant officials.

From: Afra Raymond <afraraymond@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:12 PM
Subject: Compliance of CL Financial Directors with the Integrity in Public Life Act
To: registrar@integritycommission.org.tt

To – Mr. Martin Farrell, Registrar of the Integrity Commission

Dear Sir,

The Integrity in Public Life Act requires that “Members of the Boards of all Statutory Bodies and State Enterprises including those bodies in which the State has a controlling interest” are required to file returns and declare interests with the Integrity Commission.

Clause 3.1. of the CL Financial Shareholders’ Agreement of 12th June 2009 – see https://afraraymond.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/mou21.pdf – specifies that the Board of Directors of CLF shall consist of seven Directors, four of which shall be nominated by the Government.  The GORTT has a controlling interest and it is public knowledge that the GORTT has exercised those rights, amounting to strong influence evidencing control.

It seems clear that the directors of CL Financial Ltd are therefore persons who should file declarations, and therefore also the directors of subsidiaries under their influence and control, but having visited your offices earlier today to examine the Register of Interests it seems that these Directors have not been filing returns with you.

For your information, your staff confirmed to me today 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)

I am therefore requesting, in the public interest, your confirmation that Directors of CL Financial and the companies within its control are required to file declarations or your confirmation that those Directors are not required to file or such other informative response that will satisfy this complaint of apparent non-compliance.

I await your early reply.

Yours faithfully,

Afra Raymond
B.Sc. FRICSwww.afraraymond.com

From: Afra Raymond <afraraymond@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:13 PM
Subject: Compliance of CL Financial Directors with the Integrity in Public Life Act
To: [email hidden by author]
To – Senator Larry Howai, Minister of Finance & the Economy
Honourable Minister,
The Integrity in Public Life Act requires that “Members of the Boards of all Statutory Bodies and State Enterprises including those bodies in which the State has a controlling interest” are required to file returns and declare interests with the Integrity Commission.
Clause 3.1. of the CL Financial Shareholders’ Agreement of 12th June 2009 – see https://afraraymond.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/mou21.pdf – specifies that the Board of Directors of CLF shall consist of seven Directors, four of which shall be nominated by the Government.  The GORTT has a controlling interest and it is public knowledge that the GORTT has exercised those rights, amounting to strong influence evidencing control.

In addition, the CL Financial bailout has consumed large amounts of public money, in which connection I would invite your attention to the 3rd April 2012 affidavit of then Minister of Finance, Winston Dookeran, in which the public money committed to this bailout is detailed as –

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.

For ease of reference, that affidavit can be viewed here – https://afraraymond.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/2012-04-03-affidavit-of-winston-dookeran.pdf.

That amounts to an estimated $24Bn of public money to be expended in bailout exercise and it is my contention that our country’s Integrity safeguards must be firmly in place to reduce any potential for improper behaviour or the suspicion of such.

It seems clear that the directors of CL Financial Ltd are therefore persons who should file declarations, and therefore also the directors of subsidiaries under their influence and control, but having visited the Integrity Commission offices earlier today to examine the Register of Interests it seems that these Directors have not been filing returns.

For your information, Integrity Commission staff confirmed to me today 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)

I am therefore requesting, in the public interest, your confirmation that Directors of CL Financial and the companies within its control are required to file declarations or your confirmation that those Directors are not being required to file or such other informative response that will satisfy this complaint of apparent non-compliance.

I await your early reply.

Yours faithfully,

Afra Raymond
B.Sc. FRICS

www.afraraymond.com

The Ministry of Finance Story: The Winston Dookeran Affidavit

This downloadable document is the 3rd April 2012 affidavit of then Minister of Finance Winston Dookeran, filed as the key evidence in the government’s case in reply to the High Court challenge mounted by Percy Farrell on behalf of a group of CLICO policyholders.

It is an important document since it is the official attempt to deal comprehensively with the claims that the new laws passed in 2011 to control the bailout were unconstitutional – those laws were the Central Bank (Amendment) Act, 2011 and the Purchase of Certain Rights and Validation Act, 2011. [To read the separate Bills progress in the House of Representatives, you can click here and here respectively.]

The most interesting ones are the paragraphs in which Dookeran states –

  • Para 16 at which CLICO is identified as holding 53.6% of the insurance industry’s total liabilities in T&T.  That is a clear statement as to the extent to which this company was allowed to become literally ‘too big to fail’ and it also seems to me to comprise grounds for preventing this kind of over-concentration of risk to ever emerge again.
  • Para 21 which details some $12Bn of public money already spent on this massive bailout.
  • Para 22 which estimates that a further $12Bn of public money is needed to meet the creditors’ claims.
  • Para 76 which confirms that the quarterly reports on the restructuring of CLICO for December 2011 and March 2012 have been filed in the High Court as required by the new laws cited above. 

I used this last paragraph to obtain those quarterly reports from the High Court – this is the FoI application dated 2012-05-08 and Quarterly Reports for March 2012 and December 2011 cited.

There will be more to say on this, as we need to delve into the accountability framework in relation to this exercise.

Expenditure of Public Money
 Minus         Transparency
 Minus       Accountability
 Equals          CORRUPTION

EMANCIPATION Too – a relevant republication for the Republic, yea our Nation….

This is the text of the ‘Emancipation’ column published in the Business Guardian of 30th July 2009 as my attempt to grapple with some of the the unspoken causes and consequences of this huge fiasco.

I am republishing for two reasons…

  1. Firstly, there have been recent attempts by several people to claim that the Hindu Credit Union part of the Colman Commission is not related to ‘race’…that was surprising since some of those were people who ought to know better – Sir Anthony Colman, the Guardian Editorial-writer and of course, Andre Bagoo. In my opinion a significant part of these two interlinked stories – the CL Financial and HCU collapses – is rooted in our own issues with race. It would be a grave error to dismiss race in trying to understand these crises.
  2. Secondly, the original column was published before this blog was launched, so this is a way of putting the point to those who missed it on the first subscribers.

I have not had the time to delve into the role of race in the HCU matter, so this is my offering in relation to CL Financial and our own African Emancipation Day celebrations…maybe readers can share with me if they see the relation between this situation and the HCU one…

Emancipation

This week the meaning of Emancipation is considered alongside the CL Financial fiasco. It is a painful, but necessary, task. Those of us concerned to commemorate the Emancipation of African people from slavery must have the courage and clarity to reflect on our past, both the distant and the recent. In reflection we can find direction and perhaps, the beginning of a solution.

How, if at all, is the CL Financial fiasco connected with the story of Emancipation? I deliberately use the word ‘story’ since it is clear that there are many versions of this period in our history. I say ‘our history’ because, whatever the race of today’s readers, the Emancipation journey is of vital concern to the progress of humanity.

There were notable and honourable African leaders who put up strong resistance to the efforts by Europeans to enslave their people. But the sad and inescapable fact is that there were others who thought of the process differently. It is a painful matter to discuss, but the fact is that some African rulers collaborated with the European slave-traders to capture and sell their people. Not all, but enough to make the difference. Without getting into the entire history, which is way beyond the scope of this column, the actions of that group of rulers were enough to ensure the success of the entire monstrous project. The Atlantic slave-trade shaped large elements of today’s world and we have been trying to build a new one ever since. Yes, an immoral and greedy group of rulers put a greater value on their personal enrichment than the well-being of those they were entrusted to lead.

The entire society paid the price for the selfish ambitions of these rulers.

One of the most striking things about the CL Financial fiasco is that Lawrence Duprey is one of us, an indigenous Caribbean man. Yes, a black man, with African blood flowing through his veins and that is something that has not formed part of our public discussion so far. One of the strangest features of these times is how, despite the over-supply of media, critical issues are not discussed. When one considers that the vast majority of the population of the region comes from an African background, it is striking that Lawrence Duprey is the only such tycoon in the region with his level of profile. But wait, I almost forgot that there is another one. Yes, I am speaking about Michael Lee Chin.

Whichever way you slice it, this is extremely telling and as a result Duprey carried a peculiar set of expectations. Because of his unique profile as a black man, the fact is that Lawrence Duprey was the recipient of widespread admiration, envy and wonder. That is our society and that is one of the ways we deal with its ugly realities.

To go further, the leading people in the CL Financial team were also black. Yes, most of the CL Financial team have African blood flowing in their veins. Yes, by now I can hear some readers saying things like – ‘But X or Y doesn’t think that they are Black’ or ‘So what?’ or ‘Exactly what is your point?’. That kind of skepticism is expected when one discusses this kind of issue. In fact it is my view that the underlying attitude is the very problem.

At the same time, let us note that the regulators are themselves black people. Yes, the picture I am painting is that the main players are virtually all black people – the Cabinet, the Central Bank and the CL Financial/CLICO chiefs.

We African people have come from far, both metaphorically and physically. We now find ourselves in a sorry place with this CL Financial fiasco. We have a particular responsibility to do better this time around. There is no escaping that fact.

CLICO was built around the ideal, by its founder Cyril Duprey (Lawrence’s cousin) that ‘Give a man service, give a man value and he will give you more business’. Simple, but strong, those were the foundation stones of CLICO. Truth prevailed and with hard work the company prospered. CLICO developed unprecedented levels of investor confidence, as a black company (indigenous) in which one could have faith. Given our history as African people, that level of investor confidence is no small or incidental thing. It could only have been the result of solid vision and diligent long-term application, to name just two of the qualities of the founder.

CL Financial was established as a holding company and rapid diversification followed, with investments in a number of areas unrelated to conventional insurance business. As a result of its success, CLICO was able to provide most of the cash to pay for the group’s unorthodox expansion.

At that stage, the activities of the group shifted to reflect the new ambitions of its new chiefs, most notably its Executive Chairman, Lawrence Duprey. Those activities ultimately undermined the stability and health of the whole.

The Emancipation story has many lessons, but the central one, from my point of view, is that many of our rulers lost sight of the balance between private wealth/privilege and the public good. Are we doing better now? For us, in this Emancipation week, it is useful to consider the extent to which we have learnt from our past.

The actual behaviour of the CL Financial chiefs and the group’s shareholders in this moment is instructive. At every turn, the public good has been shafted in favour of private wealth. From the payment of dividends while CLICO’s Statutory Fund was in deficit to the payment of dividends to CL Financial shareholders after they wrote for urgent financial assistance from the State. The pledging of assets which had already been pledged and the attempted sale of assets contrary to the original MoU. The shocking statement of CLICO’s new boss that $5.0Bn was missing from its Statutory Fund and the utter silence subsequently as to its whereabouts.

All this shocking behaviour and no sign of any reprimand, charge or censure from our rulers. Instead, we are told that our entire Treasury has been pledged to assist savers and restore shareholder value. Trinidad & Tobago is a land of many firsts, but this is a tragic one.

How did we get to the point of pledging our common wealth to restoring value to a few privileged people who are showing no proper regard for the public good?

Do we have the moral fibre to recognize what has gone wrong in our past and behave differently?

The Sacred Cow

 

It has been virtually six months since my last commentary on the CL Financial fiasco, my silence was due to other pressing duties, but Terrence Farrell’s No Sacred Cows published in the Trinidad Express on 16 July demands a proper reply.  For those of you who have not read it, this is a good time to take the chance to do so, by clicking on the link above.

The fact that there are potent questions of whether the best process was followed in making the critical appointment of the new Central Bank Governor, Jwala Rambarran, has been raised by several commentators, most notably in last week’s BG View Is Jwala’s appointment good or bad for T&T?  Those questions revolve around the scope of discretion which our governments are allowed in these matters and the extent to which the public interest can be sacrificed in favour of what can appear to be political favouritism.  Matters of public importance must always be open to robust scrutiny in the press.

My own view is that there is a critical series of Central Bank issues which are in danger of being obscured by the line Farrell has taken in this debate.

Email exchange with Dr. Terrence Farrell

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012, at 8:53 AM, Terrence Farrell wrote:

Dear Mr Raymond,

I took note of your article in today’s Express. I do not respond in public to comments on articles I write and I will continue that policy in respect of your comments. I merely attach for your perusal the Adlith Brown Memorial Lecture I delivered at the Central Bank in November 2010, and in particular the sections dealing with CLICO and CL Financial. That lecture was delivered before a full auditorium including Governor WIlliams and his top staff. Suffice it to say, it did not endear me to the Bank!! My name did not appear on the Bank’s invitation list for about a year afterward.

You do not know me, but I am not one who ‘puts water in my mouth’. I call a spade a spade and a shovel a shovel. Those who suggest that I leave my critiques only for this government have not read or have forgotten my article in the T&T Review on ‘Our Irresponsible Elite’, my articles in the Express on the Integrity in Public Life Act and sundry others. Re the Central Bank and CLICO, I did not have all the information then since the inquiry had not yet started and in fact up to now, the Governor and the Bank have not yet testified to the Commission. They should do so in September. But I felt I knew enough to suggest that the Bank had failed in respect of CLICO and CL Financial.

The assessment of Williams’ tenure will come (and I may well do it myself) and in that assessment the CLICO/CL FInancial debacle will not have done the Bank proud. That though is no reason to now appoint a new governor of questionable credentials and no argument to defend the ongoing assault on our institutions.

Stay well

Terrence Farrell

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Afra Raymond wrote:

Dear Dr. Farrell,

Thank you for your swift, pointed response to my article in today’s Express.

I am familiar with the Adlith Brown Memorial lecture you delivered in November 2010 and it is my view that, given what was known at that time, your critique of the Central Bank was muted – space limits did not allow me to delve into all those areas, but the evidence I cited in today’s article was all available by mid-2010. You did say that you may make a full critique of the CBTT’s role in this fiasco and that would be interesting to consider. I am not surprised that you were off the CBTT ‘guest list’ for a spell, which that tells a sad story of hubris and such.

With respect to the new Governor and for what it is worth, I am all in favor of us upgrading these systems by which key appointments are made, as per the second para of my article. I will be sure to hold him to the same high standard to which our leaders should set.

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

Afra Raymond

http://www.afraraymond.com

Sent from my iPad

From: Afra Raymond
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:18:41 -0400
To: Terrence Farrell
Subject: Re: Your Article in Today’s Express

Hello Dr. Farrell,

I am soon going to publish onto my blog an expanded version of the Express article and would like to include our email exchange, along with your 2010 Adlith Brown Memorial lecture – I am seeking your agreement to that.

More than just this immediate request, the fact is that the decision of our educated classes to opt-out of the public debate has led us to a time which is much poorer, in all the senses of that phrase…The voices we hear are largely party-political roars which are barely-sensible, the reluctance of our thinking-class to engage in a critical discourse is really the source of the brandy being served in ever-stingier portions, with some people choosing to express it as a declining (I should have written ‘increasing‘) proportion of water…As always, these issues have more than one cause and I am inviting you to reconsider your stance of not responding to comments on articles you write…let me just say that in other places it would be a matter of professional pride and minimum editorial standards that such a response be forthcoming…Of course, we might agree that not everything foreign is to be imitated, but surely such habits which cultivate progressive discourse are to be emulated….

I await your reply…

Thank you

Afra Raymond

http://www.afraraymond.com

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Terrence Farrell wrote:
Apologies for the tardy response. I am out of the country and did not have Internet access for a while.

I have no problem with you publishing the exchange on your blog. The Lecture should be on the CCMS website.

Terrence Farrell
Sent from my BlackBerry® device from…

From: Afra Raymond
Date: Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: Your Article in Today’s Express
To: Terrence Farrell

Much appreciated, I do hope you can find time to ‘tune-in’ to our discourse…

Dr. Terrence Farrell

For those who do not know, Dr. Terrence Farrell is a former national scholar and a highly-educated member of the regional financial sector.  Among his several top positions, he has been a Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of T&T.  In addition, he has also held top-level private sector appointments in the financial industry.

In writing on the CL Financial fiasco, I have adopted the phrase ‘Code of Silence’ to describe the unspoken agreement that the entire mess is to be mentioned as little as possible.  That silence is especially pronounced amongst those best equipped to analyse the issues, so the intention of the Code would appear to be to preserve the existing order of things.

Silence is the Enemy of Progress, so this crisis has exposed an abysmal showing from our most educated brethren, miserable really.  Nothing from the Accountants, Lawyers, Bankers, Insurance or other professional and industry associations.  UWI is only now becoming involved in the necessary discourse.

So, why am I taking precious time to respond to Terrance Farrell?  A few examples to show my concerns –

Firstly, in the 30th January 2009 Central Bank Press Release – by then Governor Ewart Williams – on the first page we are told:

…In our regular monitoring of CIB, and of Clico since 2004 (when insurance supervision was transferred from the Ministry of Finance), the Central Bank has consistently focused on these deficiencies but have been stymied by the inevitable challenge of change and by inadequacies in the legislative framework which do not give the Bank the authority to demand these changes….

So we need to pause here and look closely at the three facts before us –

  1. Ewart Williams was saying that since 2004 serious problems were identified in the CL Financial group and that he did not have the proper tools to deal with these.
  2. Within a week of that fateful bailout date, our Parliament had debated the Central Bank (Amendment) Bill and the Insurance (Amendment) Bill, both being assented to on Friday 6 February 2009.
  3. Farrell’s opinion is that the Governor must be “…sufficiently strong and respected to keep the financial system stable…”.  In his appreciation of Ewart Williams, he clearly conferred that level of performance onto the outgoing Governor.

The burning question is ‘Where were these Draft Bills when the CL Financial crisis was gathering force since 2004?‘  Had they been prepared and never been put to the political administration or had they been submitted and rejected by the politicians?  Or are we to believe that both Bills were swiftly drafted?

Of course all three facts cannot be correct and I believe that the third fact is the false one.  Farrell’s inference that Williams had the necessary stature to be an effective Governor is obviously disproven by the CL Financial fiasco.

Please remember that this is the same Governor who had two investments with that ‘deficient’ group.  How can one possibly reconcile a top official of acumen and strength with that investment?

But there is more.  According to para 23 of the 16 April 2010 affidavit by the Inspector of Financial Institutions:

…With respect to the Creditors of the Petitioner, the Petitioner has met the statutory obligations for the Board of Inland Revenue (except for Corporation Tax Returns for 2007, 2008 and 2009 which are being prepared and remain outstanding)…

I am reliably advised that means that CIB did not pay Corporation Tax for those years.  Yet CIB was able to retain its banking licence thoroughout that period, and, upon collapsing, obtain an immediate bailout on most generous terms.

Farrell also tells us that the Central Bank needs to be “…a decisive actor when action is required…”.  Obviously, that standard did not obtain over the last decade.

The entire scenario reeks of corruption in the highest offices in the Republic and on the largest possible scale.  We are witness to an epic swindle being carried out on our Treasury and in broad daylight.

There is plenty more evidence to discuss on this issue, including the seminal 15 July 1996 Republic Bank Letter to Shareholders  which warned of the perils of the then ongoing aggressive takeover by CLICO.

At the critical turns in this crisis, we have been without Farrell’s views in terms of the rigorous scrutiny from which we ought to have been benefitting.

Farrell also adds, in relation to Williams’ impact at the Central Bank, that it was “…repaired and strengthened by Ewart Williams over the last ten years…”.  That seems to be a straight case of Nearer to church, further from God’.  Given Farrell’s reading of events, it seems that Ewart Williams is being treated like a ‘Sacred Cow’.

That is the root of my concern here, given Farrell’s headline ‘No Sacred Cows’, which is usually used to convey that someone is a fearless critic.

I continue to be outraged that the outgoing Governor appears to have retired with full benefits after having presided over a disaster on this scale.

The quest for better governance is not just a matter of criticising the administration, the educated commentators also have to hold to some consistent standard of rigour.  Given his background, I consider Farrell’s contribution on this fiasco to be lacking that standard.

It is not too late, because I am sure that the Colman Commission would benefit from Farrell’s input in relation to the strategic view of the roots of the crisis and the sort of interventions which could have avoided this sorry situation.

For my own part, I will be looking to see how Rambarran performs on the burning issue of properly applying the ‘Fit & Proper regulations’ to the Financial Sector.  Given the poor record of the outgoing Governor on this count, I am going to be calling for the new broom to make a clean sweep.

AUDIO: The John Wayne Show Interview – 30 June 2012

Afra Raymond chats in ‘The Barbershop‘ with John Wayne Benoit on i95.5FM about the CL Financial bailout and Public Procurement issues and other topics. 30 June 2012. Audio courtesy i95.5FM

  • Programme Date: Saturday, 30th June 2012
  • Programme Length: 0:49:03 + 0:35:47

Part 1:
Part 2:

Media Integrity Too

A timeline of events within the People’s partnership period…

This is a sinister pattern, which we need to recognise now.

To seed this discussion, I have three threads…

  1. The use of Police resources to target journalists is questionable in light of the apparent, unexplained delays in dealing with the CL Financial chiefs, the UDECOTT chiefs and of course, the HCU chiefs.  The Police anti-media operations were apparently executed in exemplary fashion with warrants being obtained and searches done using the element of surprise – no reasonable person could find fault with the execution of those operations.  The burning question for me, given the apparent delays in prosecuting or even searching the ‘White Collar robbers’ – even during the recent SoE – is ‘What are the priorities of our Police Service?  Are our limited Police resources being effectively allocated in the fight against ‘White Collar crime’?
  2. The second issue is the agenda of the Media practitioners.  Despite the strong and clear statements from the Media Association of T&T (MATT) on these issues – the embargo of State advertising for the Mirror and I95.5FM, the Police search of TV6/CCN on the Ian Alleyne issue and the Police search of Newsday and Andre Bagoo – there is still no MATT comment on the Power 102.1FM dismissals and the issue of the Guardian’s Acting Editor-in-Chief sending my column on Karen Nunez-Tesheira to her for comment.  We need to be mindful of self-censorship in a world in which most of the media is in private ownership.  Which shifts into my next point…
  3. Lastly, there are the issues emerging from the world we live in now.  It is a truly New World, with the commonly-held conviction that ours is a ‘free society’.  Our Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom of association.  It also guarantees the rights of property owners and that takes me straight to the vexatious juxtaposition of those rights.  You see, if we do live in a society with all those rights, the question arises ‘What is wrong with the owner of a media outlet deciding to let-go/fire/suspend indefinitely/re-assign a particular commentator?’  Even more to the point – “Are we saying that the privately-owned media can pick-and-choose their commentators, but the State-owned outlets have a different set of rules to follow?”  Despite the provisions of T&T’s international anti-corruption and media treaty obligations in favour of whistle-blowers, there are still those who want to know what is wrong with the government deciding how to place its advertisements.

I am closing this off now; to let the discussion flow…the battle-lines are clear to me…our sentiments on the free nature of our society come into conflict with the impulse for self-protection once we achieve Public Office.  In this rounds, given the boundless nature of the new technology, we are going to see a sharper, more wily, battle to reduce the strength and clarity of our media.  I greet it.

As always, the struggle is against the enemy without and the enemy within…

  • Please view my iPad oPinion video Podcast on this topic here

VIDEO: Caribbean Economic Forum – The CLICO Debacle

This is the video of the segment from the show Making A Difference with Felipe Noguera called Caribbean Economic Forum. Appearing with guest Afra Raymond was David Walker, another prominent analyst on the CLICO debacle. Video courtesy Making a Difference

  • Programme Air Date: January 2012
  • Programme Length: 0:20:14