(Trinidad Express) Lawrence Duprey, former executive chairman of collapsed conglomerate CL Financial, was no “one-man show”, his attorney, Queen’s Counsel Andrew Mitchell, said yesterday.
Mitchell made the statement as he set out to “bury” what he described as “the Duprey myth”.
At the time, Mitchell was engaged in the cross-examination of former Central Bank governor Ewart Williams in the commission of enquiry into the collapse of CL Financial, three of its subsidiaries and the Hindu Credit Union (HCU).
Williams: From all the evidence, and from all the evidence presented here by CLICO employees, Mr Duprey made the decisions.
Mitchell: Well you know that is not something with which I agree, and though you talk about that being the evidence here from CLICO employees, I am not sure that I am in a position to accept and I am not sure that that it is necessarily the only view of the evidence that was being heard and that it is a proper view of the totality of the evidence…
Williams: Senior employees, employees of influence.
Mitchell: That is not wholly in respect right, there were… let’s face it within senior management… Let us try and bury a myth, within senior management were experienced people, weren’t there?
Williams: Yes.
Mitchell: There were people who were qualified?
Williams: Yes.
Mitchell: There were people who were either accountants or lawyers.
Williams: And there were people who had therefore an obligation not only to their job, but to their professional ethic.
Mitchell: Yes and that is why we think that a large part of the problem, in addition to all of these other things that you are talking about, was a fair amount of self-dealing. That is why.
Queen’s Counsel Peter Carter, lead counsel for the enquiry, then intervened and said he was “not quite sure” what myth Mitchell was referring to.
Mitchell: Clearly from my point of view, thank you Mr Carter, I will and continue to hold the position that it is a myth to suggest that Mr Duprey was entirely dominant and dictatorial and that all these qualified and well-paid professionals were doing nothing. We have not yet got into the analysis of the number of people who were working in senior positions within CLICO, but Mr Williams, you will be able to help. If anyone has the impression that this was a one-man show with no professionals working within the organisation, they will be wrong, wouldn’t they? There were actuaries, there were accountants, there were people dealing with ordinary day-to-day issues that permitted this insurance company, as part of the group, to grow as it did over many years into the successful position that it reads.
Williams: Yes, but there is also, in my view, and I can say that based on the fact that the Central Bank has taken civil action on some of these matters; in my view, some of the decisions that were taken by Mr Duprey led to some of the major problems. Some of the investment decisions, some of the organisational decisions, in the sense that the institution of the current account, which is something that loomed large in the inter-company transfers, was something that came from how Mr Duprey operated.
Williams described the current account instituted by Duprey as “very hidden and very opaque”, while Mitchell said it was “transparent and clear”.
Williams said CLICO “played the system to the ultimate” and adhered to “form rather than substance”.
He said CLICO felt it was “too big to fail”.
Mitchell said CLICO is currently “turning its corner, beginning to rebuild” and has a “positive future ahead of it”.
During cross-examination by Vincent Nelson, QC, lead counsel for the Ministry of Finance, Williams said the statutory fund requirement for insurance companies was “necessary but insufficient” and gives a false sense of comfort.
Williams said, prior to 2008, the Central Bank could not say CLICO policyholders were at risk, there was a “mismatch” between assets and liabilities since “time immemorial”. He said the Insurance Act supported “major loopholes”.
