It is quite a spectacular act of disingenuousness to see the Minister of State for Finance purport to question the basis of findings by the international ratings agency Standard’s and Poor’s as to the $80 million in contracts reviewed by the F.N.M. Government on taking office in May 2007. The Minister is reported to have asked to be provided with a list of the $80 million in contract the international credit rating agency said was reviewed by the FNM administration.

The Agency reportedly advised the Minister in response that the review itself and its impact on our economy as it related to a slowing of our GDP growth was a matter discussed “with a variety of market participants” The Agency advised that it consulted with government officials, public sector, private sector, international observers and that the information received as to the impact of this contract review period on investor sentiments and the economic activity compared to the expected performance “has been consistent” across the meetings.

What is especially puzzling about the Minister’s challenge to the Agency is that the Government itself placed the value of the contract review/termination exercise at $80 million.

In a statement from the Chairman of the Free National Movement in May 2007, the Chairman announced that as matter of policy the Free National Movement Government would be “assessing all contracts” some of which he outlined in his statement valued at more than $80 million.

Further in his Contribution in Parliament to the Budget Debate in June 2007, the then Minister of Public Works, Dr. Earl Deveaux highlighted 4 capital projects valued according to his calculations close to $50 million which the Government halted as part of some declared review process . It is ironic and indeed fascinating that a senior cabinet Minister in the Commonwealth of The Bahamas would in these circumstances write to an international agency to make such a ludicrous intervention.

What is important, however, is the findings of S&P clearly articulated in their report namely that the activities of the FNM government in this respect halted the momentum of our economy, negatively affected investor’s sentiments and brought substantial disruption to the contractor’s activity.

The Government has claimed that such a damaging policy was part of some trust agenda, we shall in the future be seeking clarity on the outcome of such an agenda.