Opposition questions transparency in HOPE housing initiative

The government’s handling of the Home Ownership Providing Energy (HOPE) programme has come under fire for a lack of transparency, mismanagement, and unfulfilled housing promises.

Continuing his response to the Budgetary Proposals and Financial Statements on Wednesday, Opposition Leader Ralph Thorne criticised the programme, asserting that HOPE, which was presented as a public-private partnership, was, in fact, a fully government-controlled entity. He charged that the government established HOPE in November 2020 to “promote its own housing agenda under the guise of a private entity”.

Thorne questioned the use of funds allocated to HOPE, claiming the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) was prevented from reviewing the $60 million received from the Housing Credit Fund. 

He also raised concerns over additional financial transfers from the Cabinet, suggesting the process lacked transparency and accountability.

“The PAC was going to hear that by December 31st, HOPE Inc. was given $20 million further to a Cabinet intervention. It was the Cabinet of Barbados that transferred $40 million to HOPE,” Thorne told the House of Assembly. “Since the PAC cannot hear it because of the government’s intervention, let the people hear. This is an inquiry now conducted today by the people, for the people, on behalf of the decent people of this country.”

He questioned the government’s reluctance to allow full scrutiny of the programme through the PAC, arguing that the administration was shielding itself from accountability.

“What are you going to do—investigate yourself? It was the Cabinet that incorporated the company and issued the mandate,” he argued.

Thorne also criticised the contractor selection process, claiming that 26 contractors were hired based solely on photographs of houses they had allegedly built. He claimed that 19 of these contractors were later dismissed after receiving payment for their work from public funds.

“They had to fire 19 of them, but not before they had started the houses,” Thorne charged. “These 19 people were fired after it was made clear that they had no idea of the difference between a house and a chicken coop.”

The progress of the housing projects also drew criticism. Thorne noted that only 11 houses were completed at Clifton, St Philip, with 24 more under construction at River in the same parish. 

He also questioned the affordability of the homes. The opposition leader argued that they were priced beyond the reach of those for whom they were originally intended — persons earning between $1 000 and $2 500 per month.

He also highlighted the failure of the programme’s energy component, which was supposed to incorporate photovoltaic systems that would help homeowners generate revenue from solar energy sales: “Only two houses have had photovoltaic systems installed, and even those may have been so badly installed that they had to be dismantled.”

Further criticism was directed at the appointment of a foreign chairman to lead HOPE, who, Thorne argued, was paid a significantly higher salary than his Barbadian predecessor and initially worked without a proper work permit.

The Democratic Labour Party’s sole Member of Parliament suggested that the government was using the programme to secure political loyalty, implying that homes were distributed with the expectation that beneficiaries would support the government in future elections.

“Call the election. Call it! If you’re brave, call it!” he challenged. (SZB)