The Tribune

By LYNAIRE MUNNINGS

Tribune Staff Reporter

lmunnings@tribunemedia.net

THE Free National Movement is demanding answers from the Davis administration over the whereabouts and use of approximately $700 million in excess borrowing, after the government said the funds were transferred to the National Investment Fund (NIF).

FNM Leader Michael Pintard questioned the legal authority for the transfer during a press conference yesterday, while also challenging the government to provide a detailed accounting of the funds, including where they are being held, who authorised their movement, and how much was actually transferred into the NIF.

“Where is the $700 million stashed away?” Mr Pintard asked yesterday.

He argued that while Parliament may have approved the government’s borrowing, such approval did not automatically authorise the administration to transfer the borrowed funds from the Consolidated Fund to the NIF without further parliamentary approval.

“If you first put it in the consolidated fund, you've borrowed the money. You need parliamentary approval to take the money out of the consolidated fund and put it in the national investment fund,” Mr Pintard said.

The FNM’s concerns come amid its separate efforts to obtain an accounting of approximately $265 million that was previously reflected in government fiscal reports as being held by the NIF. Those reports showed the fund’s balance falling from approximately $265.3 million in December 2025 to about $200,000 by the end of March 2026.

The opposition previously wrote to Minister of Finance Michael Halkitis demanding a full public accounting within 14 days of every dollar transferred into, out of, invested by or spent from the NIF. Mr Pintard said the party has not received a response and is now seeking legal advice on what action can be taken to compel the government to provide the information.

The party’s letter to the government contains 20 questions about the establishment and governance of the fund, including whether a board of governors and investment committee were appointed, whether a custody bank was selected, whether investment and policy mandates were issued and what authority governs withdrawals from the fund.

It is also seeking a complete transaction record showing the amount, date, recipient, approving authority, statutory authority and purpose of transactions that resulted in the reduction of the NIF’s balance.

The issue gained further attention after Director of Communications in the Office of the Prime Minister Senator Latrae Rahming recently said in a statement that he had been advised by the Ministry of Finance that the money was used “primarily” to support the government’s airport infrastructure programme.

Mr Pintard, however, questioned why NIF funds would have been required for airport projects when such developments were already addressed through the government’s capital budget and other financing arrangements.

He said the government had previously indicated that airport developments could be financed through public-private partnerships or through allocations in the capital budget.

“If the government is going to, as they're in the process of doing, refurbishing airports or building airports, they can do so through public-private partnership,” Mr Pintard said.

“Somebody else brings the money to the table. The money is allocated. The government is just responsible for paying back over time, or the government can enter into an arrangement where it is also responsible for putting up funds and paying it out of the capital budget, and then that is communicated in the budget communication, as well as it's communicated by the Minister of Works or the Minister of Transport.”

Mr Pintard said the government’s budget documents do not clearly identify an allocation from the NIF for airport development and called for the government to identify precisely how the money was spent.

He also questioned why the government had not provided the details directly through Prime Minister Philip Davis or Halkitis, arguing that the issue is too serious to be addressed primarily through the Office of the Prime Minister’s Communications Director.

Mr Pintard stressed that the FNM’s concerns were not simply political, but centred on the management and accountability of public funds, while also questioning whether any of the borrowed money was used for purposes other than those disclosed by the government, including whether any of the funds were used to finance the administration’s election voucher programme.

The FNM leader said Bahamians should not have to wait for a future report to understand how the funds are being managed, particularly as the country continues to face infrastructure challenges.

He pointed to ongoing problems, including prolonged power outages in Grand Cay and other areas, and questioned how much money is available to address such issues. He maintained that the government has a responsibility to explain how money borrowed on behalf of Bahamians is being held, transferred and spent.