HGP Nightly News – Two early loans totalling G$48 million cannot credibly explain the financing of what has been described as President Irfaan Ali’s “multi-billion-dollar” farm, the Alliance For Change has argued.
The party is calling for a comprehensive and independent investigation into the agricultural operation’s financing, saying the information released so far has left the central question unanswered: where did the rest of the money come from?
According to the AFC, records show that a G$30 million credit facility was approved in July 2012 to establish a modern poultry farm on 25 acres of leased land.
An additional G$18 million in working capital was reportedly approved in March 2015, bringing the combined financing identified by the party to G$48 million.
The AFC said that amount falls “dramatically short” of explaining the scale of the present operation.
The party’s argument assumes the two facilities were the principal funding sources during the farm’s early development. The figures do not, by themselves, rule out subsequent borrowing, reinvested earnings or other lawful sources of capital.
The AFC said those possibilities should be supported by records, not left to public speculation.
In its statement, the party criticised explanations offered by columnist Freddie Kissoon and others, saying they failed to provide a complete account of the farm’s acquisition and development.
It argued that the public expected President Ali to disclose detailed information but instead received references to loans that were “entirely insufficient” to explain the value attributed to the enterprise.
The AFC also referred to a loan reportedly secured in 2023. The amount, lender and repayment terms have not been made public.
According to the party, unless that facility exceeded G$1.5 billion, the earlier loans could not reasonably be presented as a complete explanation for financing the project.
The G$1.5 billion figure is the AFC’s estimate and has not been independently established as the farm’s cost or funding requirement.
President Ali has rejected allegations of wrongdoing and maintains that his agricultural interests predate his presidency.
“My farm is not a discovery. It is public information,” Ali said while responding to the controversy earlier this month.
The President said the farm carries a substantial loan and that his assets and liabilities were declared to the Integrity Commission. He has also denied using his office to secure preferential treatment.
Attorney General Anil Nandlall has supported that account, saying Ali was involved in commercial poultry production, vegetable cultivation and a fruit-juice business roughly 15 years ago.
Nandlall also disputed opposition claims about the farm’s size. He said the property covers approximately 60 to 70 acres, rather than the 150 acres alleged by some government critics.
The existence of a farm, regardless of its size, is not evidence of misconduct. Similarly, a difference between early loans and the alleged present value of an enterprise does not establish that its financing was illegal.
The AFC’s position is that the gap is large enough to require a transparent explanation.
Because declarations to the Integrity Commission are not ordinarily available for full public inspection, the President’s assurance that his assets were properly declared has not ended the dispute.
The party said an independent examination should review the farm’s loans, investment costs and other sources of capital, allowing the claims to be assessed against verifiable financial records.
Until that happens, the controversy rests on competing accounts. Ali says the farm was lawfully financed and properly declared. The AFC says the G$48 million identified from the early loan records does not come close to explaining what the operation has become.
