Attorney and consumer advocate Tricia Watson has called Government’s proposed Economic Diversification and Growth Fund alarming and not acceptable, saying it is being established to “give our money to substantial foreign companies”.
Watson shared her concerns via social media on Friday as the Economic Diversification And Growth Fund Bill, 2025 was under consideration in the House of Assembly. The legislation was later passed following a debate led by Minister in the Ministry of Finance Ryan Straughn.
The legislation seeks to “establish a fund, to be known as the Economic Diversification and Growth Fund, to provide financial support to certain companies to increase employment, earnings of foreign exchange and economic growth in Barbados”.
It will be capitalised by an initial $225 million “to be drawn from the Consolidated Fund over a three-year period in annual instalments of $75 million”.
“The purpose . . . is to provide financial support to qualifying companies to increase employment and contribute to economic growth. The commitment to the earning of foreign exchange is going to be absolutely critical with respect to this as it relates to the jobs,” Straughn said.
“So, companies obviously will have a real and substantive economic presence in Barbados, in order to be able to be considered, to be qualified, with respect to the fund.
Watson charged that Government had rushed to Parliament with this major law “while you are distracted by Christmas activities”.
“This was laid in Parliament on Tuesday, December 9, 2025, and is being debated on Friday, December 12, 2025. When it is passed in the Senate and assented to by the President it will go into effect immediately, no requirement for proclamation,” she said.
“The money in the Consolidated Fund is our hard-earned money or money that we will have to repay to lenders using our hard-earned money.”
One of the issues Watson had with the legislation was that certain terms were not properly defined, including “real and substantial economic presence” and “real and substantial economic activity”.
“When you look at the provisions that set out how a company can go about getting money out of this fund, there is no rigour required. There is a committee that will look at applications to get money out of the fund and make recommendations to the minister, and monitor to see if the people receiving money from the fund [are in] compliance,” she said.
“But there is little detail about the information that the company will have to provide, or what the company will have to prove in order to get our money.”
Watson added: “There is no requirement to provide financial information, no requirement for shareholder information and no ‘fit and proper’ requirement for directors and other officers of the company, no requirement for the company to prove that it is in good standing in other places where it operates.” The attorney said these were “the minimum requirements that should be in place for any company getting public funds. “To make matters worse, it says that the minister may enter into the agreement with the company for disbursement of the money. “In Barbados, ministers are not empowered to contract for the Government. This bill and the fund are utter nonsense. They do not meet the standard that is set out for handling public funds that are set out in our own laws. “There is no clarity on whether monies disbursed are grants – and therefore, don’t have to be repaid, or, if the disbursements are loans, nothing is said about repayment.” Watson also said that “there is no requirement for the Government to disclose who has applied for our money”. “There is no requirement for the Government to disclose who will get our money. There will be no accountability for what happens with this fund! This is ridiculous!” she said.
“This is not acceptable. I don’t care what party you support. I don’t care how much money you have or you do not have – this is not okay.” (SC)
