Economist tells Imbert: 'Outdated' stats were latest available on ministry's website

ECONOMIST Marla Dukharan says it is unfair for Finance Minister Colm Imbert to criticise journalists for using the most recent data on the performance of the Heritage and Stabilisation Fund (HSF) provided by his ministry.

For the financial year ending in September 2022, TT's HSF recorded its first-ever annual loss at a total of US$913,456,918.

This was revealed in its 2022 annual report, which was laid in Parliament in February but published on the Finance Ministry's website last week.

Imbert, as well as the Prime Minister, slammed a recent newspaper article highlighting this, saying the media was deliberately spreading misinformation and using old data.

Imbert then updated the country on the fund's current net asset value, which was US$5.5 billion.

He said, "This is an increase of US$754 million in the actual value of the fund over the last nine months since September 2022."

Speaking to Newsday on Wednesday, Dukharan said while the 2022 annual report may have outdated numbers and information, it had only just been published on the ministry's website.

"And indeed, on June 7, three reports on the HSF were released on the ministry’s website – the reports for Q3 2022, Q4 2022, and the annual report. This means that the public is seeing these reports about six to nine months in arrears.

"Prior to June 7, the last time a report was released was for Q1 and Q2 2022, and these were released in November 2022. So for six months we saw no updates."

She continued, "That the ministry or minister would berate the media for using 'outdated' information, which is in fact the latest information provided by said ministry/minister, is unfair and unbecoming at best.

On the loss, Dukharan said it was "quite interesting since the benchmark used to measure the fund's performance against, also saw negative returns of 15.49 per cent..."

She said this suggests that the fund’s performance was not unusual. However, she added that the fund was not invested in, according to the approved strategic asset allocation.

"This shows that the fund is not being operated and managed in accordance with the approved strategy and this could have contributed to the extent of losses seen.

"Sixty-five per cent of the fund was supposed to be invested in fixed income and 35 per cent in equity. However, in December 2021, only 49 per cent of the fund was invested in fixed income. This means that about 15 per cent of the fund was mis-allocated to equity at that time."

But she added that even if the returns on the fund were positive, there should not be material, longstanding deviation from the approved strategic asset allocation.

"Such deviation speaks to possible mismanagement and weak governance. If the approved (allocation) is somehow no longer appropriate, then the managers of the fund and the governance structure should have used the proper process to change it.

"Markets will gyrate and volatility is the new normal, hence the logic behind an approved strategic asset allocation, because the managers of the fund have decided on an investment strategy that they believe will meet the desired outcome of the fund.

"That there was such significant deviation from the investment strategy demonstrates that there is some breakdown in management and governance of the fund."