Submitted as a comment by NorthernObserver
Under its economic reform programme and arrangement with the International Monetary Fund, Government has committed to submitting NIS financial statements for the period 2010 to 2021 for audit by the Auditor General by March next year – Nation
Nation Newspaper







This is the date by which a new entity must be up and operational, to avoid sending anything to the AudGen.
If the BTMI is any example, anything issued will be “unqualified”, meaning auditors have deemed the information incomplete, and hence cannot ‘qualify’ (have any minimum level of confidence in) their report.
BUT, the editor who penned for the Nation needs to also know, what the Act governing the NIS says.
33.(1) The Board shall
(a) in each year prepare a report on its activities in its last preceding year and shall furnish such report to the Minister no later than the thirtieth day of June
(b) submit to the Minister every account, certified by the Auditor-General pursuant to Section 30, together with the report of the Auditor-General thereon, within one month of certification; and
(c) submit annually to the Minister an account of the securities in which moneys forming part of the Fund are for the time being invested
(2) The Minister shall cause a copy of every report of account submitted to him pursuant to the Section to be laid on the table before both Houses.
Hence, there has never been any reason why audited (or otherwise) financials have delayed (a) and (c), albeit, without detailed specificity, the investments of the NIS funds have appeared on their website(s) from time to time (as reported by the NIS)
The Editor needs to contact those various Board Chairs from 2006 on, and seek explanation on 33(a). Did they submit such to the Minister? If they did not, why not? And if they did, we now have a legal issue (failure to comply with the Act) as to why such reports were not ‘laid on the table before both Houses’ by the Minister receiving them.
Sir Richard Cheltenham, Q.C.: 2005 to 2008
Mr. Jepter Ince: 2008 to 2009
Ms. Sandra Forde: 2009 to 2010
Mr. Keith “Tony” Marshall: 2010 to 2011
Dr. Justin Robinson: 2011 to 2018
Mr. Ian Gooding-Edghill, M.P.: 2018 to 2020
Mr. Leslie Haynes, Q.C.: 2020 to Present
For the record, Mr.Richard Sealy former MP, was Minister of Tourism from 2010-18. In that role, Barbados disbanded the BTA in 2014, and replaced it with the BTMI and the BTPA. The BTMI was duly incorporated, owned solely by the GoB. It never filed a report, (sound familiar?) , until Nov 2021. Those reports can be found below for 14-15 and 15-16.
https://www.barbadosparliament.com/uploads/sittings/attachments/5423a8f2c26c9f65a14799a55e49467c.pdf
https://www.barbadosparliament.com/uploads/sittings/attachments/16a349f128133524642b6d6d1bacc756.pdf
Note above
The financial contents were ‘unqualified’.
So Mr Sealy left office in May 2018, and the BTMI had never accounted for itself as required by company laws in Barbados.
So when he talks about transparency and accountability, be very careful. Like a parrot he has heard the words, but it is doubtful he knows what they mean. He certainly didn’t practice what he’s now preaching?
The average Joe in Barbados is not persuaded by a boring governance matter as you described NO. It belies our touted intelligence this we know but it is what it is.
The better signature event to highlight his tenure as MoT would be his effort to encourage Bajans to take a dip with the late DLowe in the shitty waters in south coast seas.
Northern…..believe nothing put out by those liars about the BTMI horror show…more information is leaking that’s sounding more like what actually happened and the known low class behaviors coming from from such types……the teefs still in place so expect nothing better….it’s downhill all the way from here…
Leaving that shitshow was the best decision that dude made..
It is very obvious most don’t care. They just squeal like suckling pigs when it hits their pocket.
Actually true in most places.
Incapable of connecting the dots, others take advantage of that. C’est la vie.
@ David,
An archive from the Native son. Dr Robinson comes in for some severely harsh criticism. The poor man was in a comatosed state and was definitely asleep at the wheel during his reign from 2011 – 2018.
https://barbadosunderground.net/2012/01/26/notes-from-a-native-son-four-seasons-the-end/
@TLSN
For whatever reason the Native Son disagreed with the recently promoted Professor.
Source: Nation
Source: Nation
You have to give it to the PM, like the Queen in shining armour she comes galloping in to the rescue.
Source: Nation
Since I contributed several times on the NIS, I must admit when I make a mistake.
For some time I have used the number of $320,000,000 to represent the sum of NIS contributions deducted from govt/SOE employees but not remitted to the NIS, by that employer(s), pre 2018. That was incorrect. The actual number given by the PM is $457,500,000.
I have also stated that was a criminal act. That nothing in the National Insurance Act gave any employer the right to withhold from the NIS monies it deducted from its employees. The PM referred to this as “monies it {GoB} took on trust”. Apparently whether employers have the legal right to withhold and open Accounts Payable (on trust) to the NIS, the PM is willing to give the GoB “a pass”. As she was willing to do with other employers, just admit it and talk to the NIS.
In context, this seems to be because a decision was taken to pay it back, and she was clear to state the full amount of $457,500,000 had been repaid via Bonds. She said series Series B, I thought it was Series J, doesn’t much matter.
This then created the peculiar situation where it was OK to write off $1.3B in Bonds, but not $457.5M in unremitted contributions, which was repaid in Bonds, as if, the source of the money in both cases were not the same employee/employer remittances? The caveat being, the GoB will attempt to recapitalize both the NIS and the CBB as it can afford to do so.
The PM also mentioned that certain talk regarding investments was “foolishness” because the NIS has Investment Guidelines. The actual term until now has been an IPS, an Investment Policy Statement, and for the record it WAS NOT followed, and that is how the NIS ended up with a mountain of GoB Debt as ‘assets’. Investment Guidelines or policies, are of NO VALUE is they are not followed, and there are NO CONSEQUENCES to those who decide NOT to follow them. Hence, anybody who has concerns about ‘Investments’ is not without some just cause.
The PM also stressed the importance of the tri-annual Actuarial Report (likened to a medical check-up), while claiming the NIS was now current up to 2015, even though those annual reports have not yet been made public. She continued down the now well worn path of using the accrual accounting versus cash accounting method as the cause. However, said some modifications were being implemented so audits could be completed “in a hurry”. I have some difficulty believing it has taken them 5 years to arrive at this solution. It is interesting, that reports of a similar vintage from both the Caves, and then the BTMI did not mention this accounting dilemma, BUT, that information could not be found. Accountants could not verify/qualify that for which there was no tangible record.
Pingback: Prime Minster you are the one talking foolishness - Barbados Underground