Opposition demands HOPE probe as PAC clash develops

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) appeared on Thursday to be embroiled in a dispute over its investigative priorities, with Opposition Leader Ralph Thorne accusing the government of sidelining a crucial inquiry into the controversial HOPE housing project.

Thorne told reporters at a news conference of frustration with the government’s decision to prioritise an old Barbados Water Authority matter over the housing issue in the committee, despite previous commitments from the prime minister.

“I promised this country that the Public Accounts Committee under my chairmanship would pursue investigations that the people of Barbados feel are due for investigation. I promised this country that we would look at the question of housing,” Thorne said.

He recalled the prime minister’s pledge to prioritise an investigation into housing and the government-owned HOPE company established to address housing issues. But Thorne said that during a recent PAC meeting, government lawmakers voted to focus on the BWA instead.

“I am unhappy to report to you that the government members of that committee felt that the matter should go to a vote. They felt that we should not give the highest priority to housing but that we should go back to a Barbados Water Authority matter that was started when Bishop Joseph Atherley was opposition leader, I think, in 2019,” Thorne told journalists.

The opposition leader argued that the public is more interested in an investigation into housing than an old BWA issue. He also questioned the government’s reluctance to investigate the HOPE project, which he described as a “failed initiative”.

Thorne raised concerns about the government’s recent land allocation decisions, particularly the vesting of lands of the former St Bartholomew’s Girls School at Pilgrim Place, Christ Church. He expressed regret that “the government was now taking up precious lands and vesting them in a private company”.

The opposition leader called for an investigation into the $60 million allocated to HOPE and its operations. “The people of Barbados want an investigation into that $60 million. The people of Barbados want an investigation into the manner in which HOPE and the housing people have been functioning in relation to hard-earned taxpayers’ monies,” he said.

Thorne also highlighted the limitations of the PAC’s current structure, which gives significant power to the general membership dominated by government MPs. He advocated for legislative changes to empower the chairman, typically from the opposition, to set the agenda.

“If everything comes to a vote, we cannot win. We cannot win on partisan lines. So the power that we thought we had as chairman, apparently, we don’t have,” Thorne lamented.

The opposition leader issued a call to action for Barbadians, emphasising the importance of public scrutiny. “I want the people to know what has happened. The people must know. And real political power lies with the people. And let the people start sharpening their pens. If this government believes that it can suppress a legitimate exercise of inquiry, let the people start sharpening their pens soon,” he declared.

The controversy has brought renewed attention to the HOPE project and its role in the government’s housing strategy.

According to its website, H.O.P.E. Barbados, or Home Ownership Providing Energy Inc., is a wholly government-owned entity offering “attractive, open-plan, hurricane-resilient two- and three-bedroom homes at prices significantly below similar offers currently on the market”.

The opposition leader contested the nature of HOPE’s operations: “I insist that HOPE is a private company. They call it a public-private sector partnership. It is a private company. It is run by private individuals. It behaves like a private company.”

Thorne raised concerns about the project’s financial management, alleging that “Its salaries are set up to $30 000 a month. It is set within that private company. It has a relationship with the Cabinet, in which the Cabinet picked up $60 million and gave it to them.”

Thorne’s criticism extended to what he perceives as the marginalisation of the National Housing Corporation. “I complained during the budget debate that it seemed as if the government was marginalizing the National Housing Corporation, which had served this country for close to 70 years,” he said.

The opposition’s push for a housing investigation comes against the backdrop of broader concerns about government spending and accountability. Thorne emphasised the PAC’s role in ensuring the prudent use of public funds: “The purpose is to ensure that the government spends the money of the people prudently. And we are frustrated in our effort to ensure that those funds were spent prudently.”

The dispute over the PAC’s investigative priorities has also highlighted the committee’s structural limitations. Thorne explained that legislative changes in 2003 altered the balance of power within the committee. “Previously, the PAC functioned according to the standing orders of the parliament, but that piece of legislation has given a lot of power to the general membership,” he said.

This shift has resulted in what Thorne describes as an “overwhelming majority” of government members on the committee, potentially hampering the opposition’s ability to set the investigative agenda.