The Tribune

NO WONDER FNM Chairman Darron Cash yesterday demanded to know where NIB Minister Shane Gibson had hidden “the beef”.

After such a build-up about what was to be expected on the release of the Grant Thornton audit of the National Insurance Board under director Algernon Cargill, the leak of a part of the report to a section of the press on Monday, fell flat as readers searched for the promised scandal. Page after page was turned, but all that could be found was “the same old, same old” – by now the pudding was stale.

Yes, Mr Minister, like Mr Cash, we would also like to know where the “beef” is hidden.

On March 27, The Tribune reported: “The much anticipated forensic audit report that examined the National Insurance Board’s operations dating back to 2003 contains shocking revelations, claimed NIB Minister Shane Gibson yesterday.”

Mr Gibson went on to say that he had not got very far in reading the hundreds of pages, but already the findings were worse than he imagined.

That was really saying something, especially coming from a man who himself, not so many years ago, was enmeshed in a shocking scandal. Although the NIB allegations, if true, are serious, they are not new. Also the reports have been in circulation for so long and the whole process handled so badly by the minister that many are now questioning whether in the final analysis this is not just another political smear campaign. Time will soon tell.

A seemingly agitated Minister Gibson was on the radio yesterday complaining about Mr Cargill’s non-cooperation with the auditors by refusing to meet with them to discuss the NIB report — don’t forget the report has been completed, conclusions reached, report delivered, and only now do they want to meet with the man they have pilloried.

Mr Gibson knew it, but did not bother to give the radio audience the reason why Mr Cargill could not meet on May 21 to discuss the report. The reason: He is to attend his son’s graduation from university in the United States on that date — a date over which he nor the NIB have any control. They could have set a date for after his return, but, no, it has to be May 21.

The impression given was that Mr Cargill was being difficult and has refused to cooperate with the auditors. This is not true, Mr Cargill is just demanding his rights. And, like everyone else he has a right to be treated fairly.

On February 8 this year, The Tribune published an interview with Mr Cargill’s lawyer, Alfred Sears. Mr Sears criticised Grant Thornton, the auditors, for not providing Mr Cargill with a list of questions that could be asked of him during a meeting tentatively scheduled for the previous day. Mr Sears interpreted the position taken by the auditors as indicating that nothing negative was to be reported on his client — therefore, there was no need to question him.

“It is a standard practice to provide, especially the principal subject… an indication of what you would like to discuss with them so they can bring other relevant information that may assist the investigation,” Mr Sears told The Tribune at the time.

He might have added that to arrive prepared, thus saving time, would be the most cost effective approach to conducting such an exercise. If Mr Cash wants to know where the “beef” is hidden, he should look to the final cost of this audit. We have no idea what the cost will be, but there are those who have estimated it to be in the region of a million. Yes, and you have guessed it — it will probably be paid from hard working Bahamians’ insurance savings.

First it was a bungled referendum — although no one yet knows the cost of that, the figure in public circulation is in the region of a million dollars, if not more. If this audit is another million, which will climb if Mr Cargill takes his case to court — then, Mr Cash, you will have much beef to chew on!

For a country that is bankrupt, this is all madness.

Still haggling in February for a date and a list of questions for a meeting, Grant-Thornton eventually sent Mr Sears an e-mail: “We are prepared to meet with your client for him to ask any questions that he has. We have no questions for Mr Cargill at this time to complete this phase of our report.”

Imagine a prosecutor asking an accused to do the questioning. It is absolutely mind-boggling.

The auditors took at least five months to prepare their report, during which time, they could have questioned Mr Cargill. Now NIB has given him 14 days in which to go over that report with his lawyer and be prepared to discuss it. And, although we are told that NIB had prior notice of the graduation date, it appears that that is the only day they can see Mr Cargill. Of course, on the radio yesterday Mr Gibson so presented the matter that it made it seem that Mr Cargill was being uncooperative.

All we can hope is that Fr James Moultrie, who on being appointed chairman of the National Insurance Board was described by the Prime Minister as “a man of unblemished integrity”, will not let that integrity be tarnished by these political manoeuvrings. Having himself been a one time PLP politician — 12 years as an MP for Rock Sound, Eleuthera — and having had a rough political passage for a short time before entering the priesthood, he should know by now that politics is a dirty game.

Fr Moultrie is now the man in the hotseat and will be called on to make many decisions. We hope that he remembers that he now serves a higher Master, and that whatever decisions he makes will be fair.