Toying with our future
Dwight L. Moody has noted that success in any human endeavour is consequent upon sincerity and commitment to transparency. In his words, “Now if we are going to overcome, we must begin from within. God always begins from there. An enemy inside the fort is far more dangerous than one outside.”
Advertisement
The National Pensions Regulatory Authority (NPRA) seems to be dithering and passing the buck over delays in transferring money accrued under the Temporary Pension Fund Account as part of the transitional arrangement towards the second tier pension scheme. As reported by the Graphic Business last week, NPRA accused corporate trustees of failing to apply for the release of the funds.
Between corporate trustees and beneficiaries, contributors should have primarily been informed about the availability of the funds. The point is that for the past five years that the transition arrangement has been operative, beneficiaries have received their accounts only once and that is for the 2010 deductions. That means beneficiaries do not know how much has accrued in their names. That is why we need to challenge NPRA to act with despatch in the transfer of the money.
Beneficiary information
Beneficiaries know their corporate trustees and would put pressure on them to access the money if indeed it is available, as NPRA seems to suggest. But before that, beneficiaries must be told how much they have earned. NPRA has to render proper accounts to all beneficiaries. That is the proper thing to do, since the other part of the equation of when the accrued lump sum payments earned at the time of the transition would be transferred by the Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT) to the accredited corporate trustees has not been explained to them.
In the matter of the second tier pension scheme and the best interest of beneficiaries, NPRA and the Trades Union Congress (TUC), in particular, have not been fair to workers. They are not acting any differently from SSNIT which appears to be focussed on fulfilling the dictates of the government in accessing cheap money rather than the interest of workers in earning good returns. The same TUC which fought hard to stop the use of a percentage of the pensions contribution to finance the national health insurance to provide better health care has now kept an eerie silence that had it not been for the workers on government payroll, the matter would have died.
Transparency
As Jesus said of the lady who poured the expensive perfume on his feet and cleaned it with her hair, whenever the question of the unanswered policy of when lump sums earned with SSNIT be transferred to beneficiaries and where the money lodged under the TPFA could be found, the TUC would be cited.
There is the need for transparency in dealing with the matters which are critical for the future of workers, especially those proceeding on retirement this year, as the first group of beneficiaries under the new pension scheme. How different and enhanced are their earnings as against those who have been on retirement from 2010 when the new policy became operational? There must be substantial improvement under the new scheme to underline the positive implications of the new scheme. That is why the administration of the new scheme must not be fraught with any deficiency from the beginning to give meaning to a local saying that: “If you will get a second dose, the first is in full or that a corn that will grow to develop a good cob begins from how it sprouts.”
In any case, if NPRA genuinely feels that corporate trustees are causing the delay, what stops it from transferring the funds to those three trustees who have complied with the directives as a sign of goodwill and to demonstrate its readiness to disburse the funds to allay fears that the money could have been deployed for other national purposes.
NPRA and trustee meeting?
In any case, is it true that the NPRA met the registered corporate trustees on December 22, 2014, when the announcement was made that the process of applying to access funds would be put on its website to enable them to apply? Could December 22 be described as early in the month considering the fact that two days later we entered the Christmas season, when most establishments went on leave until the next month and year?
Whatever the issues are, TUC must break its silence on this matter because contrary to misconceptions that the matter is about workers on government payroll, it is a matter that affects all classes of workers who were less than 55 years when the new policy became operational in 2010.
