Shadow over NEDCO

WE EXPECT that the Auditor General’s Department will conduct a thorough-going investigation into the financial transactions of the National Entrepreneur-ship Development Company Limited, particularly the loan disbursements NEDCO made during the period of the last General Elections. We expect also that when the Auditor General’s report is submitted to the Minister of Finance, he will promptly make it public by laying the document in parliament. In our view, this is absolutely necessary if the questions being raised about the operations of this state-owned funding company are to be satisfactorily resolved.

The NEDCO issue was first raised in parliament a few weeks ago by Opposition MP Roodal Moonilal who charged that large sums of money had disappeared from the coffers of the company. Later, the UNC MP wrote to DPP Geoffrey Henderson alleging that the missing sum amounted to $17.4 million. In reply, Mr Henderson pointed out that the evidential threshold had not been crossed at this stage to trigger a police investigation. “However,” he pointed out, “the issue that you have raised may or may not involve breaches of prudent lending policies and criteria. On the other hand, it may involve something else.” The reports we have gathered from a variety of other sources seem to indicate that Dr Moonilal’s concerns may have some substance, that there was and is more to the functioning of NEDCO than meets the eye. To begin with, we are less than comfortable with the fact that NEDCO, launched in August 2002, ostensibly to create and assist entrepreneurs in the country, should have been placed under the Ministry of Labour. What is a strictly funding company doing in such a Ministry? What was the thinking and purpose behind this placement?

If what Dr Moonilal and other critics of the NEDCO programme say is true, then the company, formed strategically two months before the last elections, functioned in reality like another community-based CEPEP from which large grants, issued in the form of loans, were distributed to PNM party activists, supporters and relatives of members of the Government. Dr Moonilal stated: “We heard from the Minister that as of October 31, 2002, the sum of $17.4 million was disbursed in loans. Now, something sounds a bit fishy here. If the programme was launched on August 1, 2002 and as of October 31, 2002, $17.4 million was distributed, something must be wrong.” According to the Opposition MP, Minister Achong has not been forthcoming in answering repeated requests for the names of those who had received NEDCO loans. Now what is the reason for this reluctance? If NEDCO has been pursuing its given mandate to assist entrepreneurs in the country, why is the Labour Minister refusing to disclose the names of its loan recipients? Is it because the list will not be much different from the line-up of CEPEP beneficiaries?

Even before the Auditor General completes his report, we would appeal to Mr Achong, as a matter of transparency, to announce the names of NEDCO loan recipients together with the amounts disbursed to each and the respective entrepreneurial projects for which the funding was granted. We would also like to know other things from the Minister. For example, where did NEDCO’s money come from, since in that 18-18 stalemate period there were no budgetary provisions, and who were the company’s loan officers and what criteria did they use in granting these pre-election “loans.” Time to be accountable, Mr Achong.