The Bahamas’ opposition is pressing for an audit of $310.9 million in National Investment Fund spending, alleging the Davis administration used the vehicle as an “off-the-books” capital account to fund infrastructure ahead of the election and keep the outlay from denting the budget surplus.
Bahamas opposition seeks audit of $310.9M fund spending
The dispute matters because it goes straight to fiscal transparency, debt accounting and parliamentary control over public money. If the government is right, the fund provided a legal channel for capital works and airport upgrades. If the opposition is right, the spending may have bypassed the Consolidated Fund and obscured the true fiscal position at a time when the country is trying to preserve a revised $32 million surplus target.
Finance Minister Michael Halkitis said the $310.9 million was spent on roads, buildings, water systems, courts and airports, and insisted the government acted within the law while the National Investment Funds Act 2022 remained only partially activated. He said legal advice from the attorney general’s office supported use of the Ministry of Finance and the Public Treasury under the Public Finance Management Act until the fund is fully operational.
But the opposition says the explanation raises more questions than it settles. FNM leader Michael Pintard and chairman Duane Sands argue the money was routed through a Central Bank account in the fund’s name without a properly convened board, turning the vehicle into a second Consolidated Fund with little or no oversight. They are demanding a full accounting, and the Public Accounts Committee plans to call Treasury officials next week.
The controversy has intensified because the numbers still do not reconcile cleanly. Halkitis said $210.6 million went to roads, building improvements and water upgrades, while $100.3 million went to airport projects in Cat Island, San Salvador, Exuma and Long Island. Opposition figures say that conflicts with earlier government messaging that the fund was mainly for airports, and with the larger $700 million in “excess borrowing receipts” the government said it transferred to the fund during the 2025-26 fiscal year.
For investors and creditors, the issue is less about the projects themselves than the credibility of The Bahamas’ fiscal framework. A government that can move borrowing proceeds through a side account without immediate impact on the deficit may appear to be managing its balance sheet more tightly than it really is, while also building liabilities taxpayers may have to service later. That can matter for bondholders watching debt dynamics, especially after the country’s national debt rose by about $1 billion in the budget year even as the deficit stayed relatively contained.
The row also raises governance risk at a sensitive political moment. Central Bank governor John Rolle has already said the fund’s board was never properly convened, despite appointments, and the opposition says that leaves unanswered how the account was opened and who approved transfers. Halkitis has promised the fund will be fully operationalized by year-end and that the government will cooperate with any probe, but the next flashpoint is likely to be the PAC hearing and any legal opinion the opposition receives this week.
| Entity | Gains | Losses |
|---|---|---|
| Davis administration | ▲Capital spending flexibility | ▼Fiscal transparency |
| Opposition/FNM | ▲Oversight leverage | ▼Election-year optics |
| Bahamian infrastructure projects | ▲Funding for roads, airports, courts | ▼Budget scrutiny |
| Bondholders/taxpayers | ▲Clarity if audited | ▼Hidden liabilities risk |


