The Tribune

By LEANDRA ROLLE

Tribune Chief Reporter

lrolle@tribunemedia.net

PRIME Minister Philip “Brave” Davis yesterday rejected the opposition’s allegation of fraud over the government’s handling of the National Investment Fund, insisting the transactions were transparent even as he did not address demands for an accounting of more than $400m.

Mr Davis, breaking his silence on the matter, defended Finance Minister Michael Halkitis’ explanation to Parliament after FNM leader Michael Pintard said the minister accounted for only $310.9m of roughly $700m the government previously said had been transferred to the NIF as excess borrowing receipts.

Mr Davis said Mr Halkitis had explained “very thoroughly” why money was transferred and where it went, and maintained there was nothing untoward about the government’s actions.

“Our priority and our choices could be different from theirs,” Mr Davis said, “and because our choices and our priorities are different from theirs doesn't make it any no malfeasance.”

He questioned why the opposition would allege wrongdoing simply because it would have made different spending decisions.

“Why would you want to attach malfeasance or any untoward conduct on our part because they would have done it differently, or they would have chose differently,” Mr Davis said. “That’s why they remain where they are.”

Mr Pintard has accused the government of committing “fraud with public money” and instructed attorneys to examine whether its handling of the fund breached criminal, constitutional or statutory law and what legal remedies may be available.

Mr Davis rejected the fraud allegation and argued that the controversy itself arose because the government disclosed the transactions in its fiscal reports.

“The irresponsible characterisation of this matter as fraud, without even knowing the facts,” Mr Davis said, ignored “the fact that this is a transparent transaction”.

“The concerns raised by them about the transfer of the funds,” he said, “was because we reported it. Isn't that transparent?”

“If it was not reported and contained in our reports, they would not have been able to raise it,” Mr Davis said. “It wasn’t hidden. It said what we did.”

Mr Halkitis told Parliament on Wednesday that $310.9m in NIF proceeds had been used for public infrastructure, including $210.6m on buildings and roads and $100.3m on aviation infrastructure.

He said the government relied on parliamentary borrowing authority and the Public Finance Management Act to administer the money through the Ministry of Finance and Treasury while the NIF’s governance arrangements were still being developed.

But Mr Pintard said the explanation left more than $400m of the roughly $700m unaccounted for and called on the government to provide a full breakdown of the money and identify where it is held.

Mr Davis did not address that issue yesterday.

The controversy intensified after Central Bank Governor John Rolle confirmed that the NIF’s Board of Governors had never formally convened, despite an account bearing the fund’s name being maintained at the Central Bank and government fiscal reports recording hundreds of millions of dollars moving through the fund.

Government reports showed the NIF held $265.3m at the end of December 2025 but just $200,000 at the end of March, a reduction of about $265.1m. The National Investment Funds Act assigns the Board of Governors responsibility for managing the fund and establishes its role in the fund’s governance and oversight, including its banking and investment arrangements. Opposition members contend that transactions undertaken through the fund while the board had never convened were unlawful. Mr Halkitis has rejected that position and insisted the government acted within the law. Mr Pintard said the opposition has instructed attorneys to examine the government’s handling of the NIF and advise whether any laws were breached and what legal remedies may be available. The FNM has not yet decided whether to launch a court challenge.

Mr Davis said yesterday he welcomed continued scrutiny from the opposition.

He said he welcomes “whatever political antic they think will get the answers.”