Walter Blackman Comments on the 15th Actuarial Review of the NIS of Barbados – Misallocation of Human Resources

Walter Blackman – Actuary and CBC Talk Show host

The 15th actuarial review of the Barbados NIS is special in that the report was written at the end of the first 50 years of the scheme’s existence. This review therefore gives us an opportunity to see to what extent the NIS reflects the negative features and characteristics of the Barbadian society and economy which have emerged since independence.

The single biggest contributor to the downward slide and decline of Barbados, as a nation, is the misallocation of its human resources. From top to bottom, in private and public, we see and feel the deleterious effects of persons holding critical positions who have no basic understanding of what their roles are, and who are far less interested in knowing how to perform them. Whilst no attention is paid to effectively performing the job, every effort is put into extracting the essence and perquisites out of the position on one hand, and using every ounce of power associated with it to achieve personal and, very often, nationally damaging ends, on the other.

Over the last 50 years, some individuals have created a “science” out of leveraging their positions for social, political and economic advancement. This “science” has been carved from a litany of fraudulent practices which have left both the Barbadian government and taxpayer impoverished and bewildered. Today, too many government departments are owed hundreds of millions of dollars by individuals and companies possessing the capacity and willingness to pay. Payment would be forthcoming, if only a minimal amount of pressure were applied to the delinquent offenders. However, no effective pressure is ever applied. What is responsible for this? Corruption?

This urge, on the part of the Barbadian individual, to focus solely on the “sweets and power” of an office or position, and not on its function, has resulted in a plethora of unenlightened, retrogressive minds spending most of the working day trying to identify people who are more qualified, or perceived to be “brighter” or more talented than they are, and then viewing them as threats to be despised, sidelined or destroyed.

Gripped by feelings of insecurity, and conscience-ridden because of their glaring lack of ability, these retrogressive minds then proceed to handpick surrogates who must be just as dull, or duller than they are, so that they can shine. Fifty continuous years of this practice have succeeded in creating a core of mediocrity at the centre of almost everything Barbadian. The corrosive nature of this phenomenon has become so pervasive, that many of our major national institutions, held firmly in its grasp, are now spiraling uncontrollably towards moribundity.

When local talent is not being misallocated and suffocated on the home front, it is being ruthlessly and stupidly sidestepped in favour of utilizing foreign individuals and entities. Some of these foreign individuals and entities, despite having dark and shady backgrounds, have been able to secure multi-million dollar business deals and contracts with successive governments. How can a small country like Barbados, along with its institutions, develop and grow if successive governments continue to discriminate against its citizens and deliberately pursue a policy of enriching aliens? What fuels this glaring propensity to keep Barbadians down by marginalizing and disregarding their talents?

As a country, Barbados is now unable to withstand the slightest scrutiny by independent international agencies. Public administration in our country has become so woeful and pathetic that, according to Morneau Shepell Ltd, the foreign actuarial firm which produced the report, “in 2016, the IMF raised concerns about data inconsistencies and the credibility of some national statistics.” This is a shameful pronouncement on the state of our national collective incompetence.

The NIS is a national institution which affects almost every Barbadian because of the universality of its coverage. To achieve its long-term national objectives, the NIS, during its first 25 years, ought to have been equipped with skilled, well-trained employees who could help conceptualize, map, and automate all of the processes involved in registering and covering workers, collecting premiums, paying benefits and administrative expenses, producing financial statements, and generating credible data for use in actuarial assumptions and demographic projections. Having such a cadre of employees was extremely vital to the long-term viability of the NIS.

The NIS, specifically the part of it that was born as a department of central government, was breastfed from infancy with the milk of backward-thinking civil service attitudes and human resource limitations. Over time, heavy political interference with and influence over the civil service recruitment process, and over the day-to-day functioning and operations of some departments, took its toll and retarded the growth of the institution. Lax management practices and the expected mishandling of contributions made a bad situation even worse.

After 50 years of operation, instead of having an efficient, fully automated system in place, the NIS now finds itself in an embarrassing position where Morneau Shepell Ltd had to alert anyone reading the 15th actuarial report that the preparation of the report was delayed. It is instructive to note the explanation given by the foreign actuarial firm for the report’s delay:

“Data issues delayed the preparation of this report and also affected the quality and reliability of some data that was provided.”

“…some statistical data were incomplete and financial statements unaudited..”

“The delayed preparation of this report is due to administrative system issues which affected the collection of timely and accurate demographic and financial data.”

The foreign actuaries went on to hint to Barbadians and policymakers that “….these data issues may influence specific rates and years when key events are projected to occur…”

The anguish and heartbreak resulting from this unhealthy state of affairs will be felt by only a few Barbadians. This is so because the bulk of the population has no idea of the amount of money which has been spent by NIS on computer hardware systems and software packages. Tales have been told by NIS “insiders” about money “flowing like a burst pipe” into the hands foreign consultants and retailers for the purchase and setting up of computer systems and associated software packages. Despite the outlay of massive sums of money, which have contributed to the depletion of our foreign reserves, the NIS has not been able to produce a seamless automated system to ensure that credible elements of data are produced, and that benefits are paid in an accurate and timely manner. As a first step toward transparency, Barbadian taxpayers need to demand that an official enquiry be made into the amount of money spent by the NIS on computer hardware and software since 1980. The analysis should show who the payees are, and how much was expended in foreign currency. In this area, something appears to be rotten in the state of Denmark.

There is one slight detail in the report which many readers would tend to overlook. According to Morneau Shepell, outstanding NIS contributions at December 31, 2014 totaled $224 million. However, at a press conference held in early September 2017, Mr. Ian Carrington, Director of NIS, announced that the current amount of arrears owed to the scheme was $650 million (cf Loop News, September 2, 2017). So, is it possible that in less than three years, outstanding contributions to the NIS had increased by $426 million? This seems highly unlikely.

The $650 million figure becomes slightly more palatable after one studies page 9 of the actuarial report, which lists, in part, the amount of un-invested assets at December 31, 2014:

Contributions receivable 223.7 million

Accounts receivable 220.3 million

This approach suggests that “total receivables” of $444 million at December 31, 2014 grew to $650 million at August 31, 2017. This represents an increase of almost 50% over the period, and serves to highlight a situation that is downright unsatisfactory. This clear evidence of incompetence and general refusal on the part of civil servants to collect revenue for government explains why taxpayers’ disposable income is dwindling at such an alarming rate.

If nothing else, the 15th actuarial report shows that there is an urgent need to reform the NIS. The institution needs to be extricated from the grips of the civil service and its associated political influence. It should be established as an independent agency with a Board of Directors and staffed appropriately. Instead of having representatives from the Barbados Workers’ Union (BWU) and the National Union of Public Workers (NUPW), it should have one representative from the Congress of Trade Unions & Staff Associations of Barbados (CTUSAB). In addition to the Barbados Employers’ Confederation (BEC), representatives from the Barbados Private Sector Association (BPSA), the Barbados Chamber of Commerce & Industry (BCCI), the Small Business Association (SBA), the Barbados Association of Medical Practitioners (BAMP), the Credit Union League (CUL), the Central Bank, the Bar Association, the Ministry of Labour, and the Ministry of Finance should constitute the Board.

The investment committee of the NIS should be made up of competent professionals with a proven track record in the areas of finance and investments. The ultimate decision-making power over the investment of NIS funds should reside with the Board, acting upon the recommendations of the newly constituted investment committee, rather than in the office of the Minister of Finance.

Annual actuarial valuations of the NIS should be carried out by Barbadian firms, or an in-house Barbadian actuary, with the aim of preserving scarce foreign exchange and developing Barbadian actuarial expertise.

108 comments

  • One of the great failures of the social partnership was to put private sector members on committees and quasi-government boards etc, who know nothing about about governance . They are the ones who believe that sending public home public servants is the ONLY answer to our problems. Some of these private sector McGuffies are unfit to assist in government policy. They usually end up threatening to fire workers if they do not get their way. These are mainly people who inherited wealth and carry a very negative opinion of the working class. No wonder then that we can’t get anything right because we are still seeing essentially retail operators as business icons. In fact many of them have very little to offer, a point that is completely lost on people like Donville Innis. You cannot put people who are essentially risk averse in the forefront of transforming or restructuring an economic system. . We have now reached the stage of even copying Black Friday , and other North American marketing/sales gimmicks. People ask why we have not produced anything that represents our heritage and it simply has to do with the sad fact that we are looking to people who brought us to this point to rescue us.
    Since Don Blackman skipped town, there has not been one politician to even address the elephant in the room. We hailed Rockers Alley and romanticize about a Barbados that has long gone and now the great grandchildren of those who built this rock are chased from pillar to post , in search of opportunity and being called lazy and non -productive. An essentailly Black public service must now be the sacrificial lamb and further condemned to poverty because those who have the wealth do not intend to take chances with all the profits they have made for the better part of close to four hundred years. They intend to prolong the current economic system , with the occasional window dressing and superficial nonsense for as long as they can, knowing full well that we will be left to scramble for the collar and tie jobs while young people , in other countries are going to work in expensive jeans and are already millionaires.
    We have been reduced to pseudo intellectuals and nothing more. Many of our children will be without the skills to challenge the new technological economic order and the day will come when they will have MBAs but are maids and porters.

    Like

  • @ Walter
    Man give it a rest with provoking Caswell nuh!!!

    …mean after Bushie dug deep to make peace, the two o’ wunna still with this nit picking?

    EVERYBODY knows that the way to get Caswell’s goat is to criticise a worker for ANYTHING except for their failure to join Unity…

    You spoke of ‘persons from top to bottom having no understanding of their roles..”
    SURELY you expected a Caswell attack….!!

    You were never that good at chess, but Bushie really thought that you had given Caswell that rook to eat – expecting that he would then bring his queen out on the attack (which he did with devastating effect…) – with sordid details about software scams, internal thievery and pure inefficiency.

    Boss, all you need to do now is play for a stalemate … and start article number 2.

    Like

  • Caswell Franklyn November 26, 2017 at 1:14 PM #
    “Walter

    The best place for NIS is in the Public Service.”

    Caswell,
    I do not agree, but I respect your view.

    With respect to governance of the NIS, here is what the foreign actuarial firm Morneau Shepell said on page 6 of the 15th actuarial review:
    “Performance deficiencies arising from inadequate human resource skills and lack of accountability indicate the need for a review of the department’s organizational structure….”

    Like

  • @Walter

    This is a serious matter. Does Walter Maloney sit on the NIS Board? Is he a talk show host on public media outlet? Personal integrity is something we need to hold people to account.

    Like

  • @ William…
    Caswell did not even fart on Bushie…
    That’s a gem !!!!
    Ah can’ believe you don’ know why, Bushie. LOL.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    First, Caswell is a REAL funny fella… not ‘funny’ as in ‘ha ha’ … funny as in ‘strange’…
    It just pisses him off that Bushie knows so much about him… 🙂

    Secondly,
    Skippa, if Bushie was to waste time trying to work out why people don’t like him or pay him any damn mind, then there would be no time left to live.
    It is the story of Bushie’s life….

    But guess what…?
    BT don’t give two shits.
    Just drive the whacker in their donkeys, and move on to the next brass bowl weed…

    On another note, Bushie has to agree with your 1.22 p.m.
    BUT…
    You have to be careful.
    You trashed the BLP
    You trashed the DLP
    You now trashed the private sector…
    Boss … if you miss and cuss the Church now,
    …you know that you and Bushie will be at one…??!!
    You are just one pip from brass bowl land….

    LOL
    ha ha ha

    Like

  • The single biggest contributor to the downward slide and decline of Barbados, as a nation, is the misallocation of its human resources. From top to bottom, in private and public, we see and feel the deleterious effects of persons holding critical positions who have no basic understanding of what their roles are, and who are far less interested in knowing how to perform them.

    @Walter
    In simple language, this is called incompetence, one of the biggest causes of the decline of the nation as you rightly point out. But it is not the biggest.
    In the case of the NIS, the need for up-to-date technology with competent staff is a good starting point. However, the hybrid NIS is not fit for purpose.
    No matter how competent the staff, the professional integrity of the chairman and board, and the humility of the politicians, the scheme is a misfit for a modern economy.
    We need to hypothecate the various functions of the scheme, separating out the welfare function from the long-term savings function.
    With the latter, we need to introduce a compulsory savings plan (Chile did this in 1981 and the rest of the civilised world has followed). Let us have a national discussion about long-term savings (by calling it pensions it puts off young people), before designing an appropriate scheme.
    In terms of the present scheme, its investment policy exposes the enormous ignorance not only of the people running the scheme, but of those who want to intervene (politicians and the public intellectuals).
    I am not yet convinced that Dr Robinson knows anything about the practicality of investment, even though he may have the paper qualifications. If he does, he is hiding it very well.
    Recently he indicated that the poor return on investments is due to the underperformance of the markets, and was allowed to get away with such patent nonsense.
    I wrote an outline of awn asset allocation policy, which is still legitimate and which I stand by. But, typically, only one fool became involved to question my reference to ETFs; it was the same person that said that Logic was not central to philosophy, so did not matter.
    Dr Robinson, however, need to explain why, for the period up to the end of June, the S&P 500, the world’s leading market, has made returns of 17.9 per cent, 14.6 per cent and 7.2 per cent for the one, five and ten years respectively.
    This clearly indicates to me, that such returns in a global low-interest environment must be blamed at the asset allocation policies of the scheme.
    My suggestion is Dr Robinson must lift the bonnet and get his hands dirty, having a theoretical knowledge of the global investment markets is not enough. Does he have regular client/adviser meetings with Oppenheimer? If so, what are the outcomes? Publish them on the NIS website.
    Dr Robinson and his colleagues should also look at the index tracking of some leading endowment funds, which are making spectacular, if slightly less stellar, returns.
    Finally, let me go back o an issue we discussed some time ago. If COW Williams, or Apes Hill or any of his companies approached the NIS for funding, the obvious questions is why?
    This presumably is a commercial operation and should be measured as such, not just by look at the balance sheet, but as all good financial analysts do, by also looking beyond the balance sheet.
    First, if a commercial company needs funding, it should go to the markets, either banks, non-banks, issuing shares and bonds or raising the funding privately.
    If taxpayers’ money was to be invested it shou8ld have been on a debt for equity basis. None of these seem to be the case.
    This I suggest is further evidence of NIS incompetence; it is also a reason to question the professional integrity of Dr Robinson, since if he objected to lending this money and it was forced through by the politicians he should have resigned immediately.
    If it was a policy that he agreed with, then he owns the Barbadian public an explanation, and even more an apology.
    To discuss the NIS as if it is fit for purpose is disingenuous since it is not. We need tro go back o basics and start again.

    Like

  • Bush Tea November 26, 2017 at 1:24 PM #
    “@ Walter
    Man give it a rest with provoking Caswell nuh!!!

    …mean after Bushie dug deep to make peace, the two o’ wunna still with this nit picking?

    EVERYBODY knows that the way to get Caswell’s goat is to criticise a worker for ANYTHING except for their failure to join Unity…”

    Bush Tea,
    Actually I was not nitpicking.
    NIS belongs to all of us so I wanted BU readers to gain further clarity with respect to some of the points I made in the article, or become exposed to viewpoints which are different from mine.
    In my comments this morning, I sincerely thanked Caswell for reinforcing and amplifying some of the points made in the article. To my mind, he contributed significantly to its publlc education goal. Others did too, and I want to take this opportunity to thank them also.
    With just a teeny bit of “provocation”, I managed to get Caswell to express his opinion that the NIS should remain within the public service. His position on that matter is different from yours, or Sunshine Sunny Shine’s, or mine. It shows us that regardless of how right we think we are in our stance on a particular matter, others feel just as convinced that we are wrong, or their personal “agenda” might force them to vote otherwise.
    I made sure that I let Caswell know that I respected him for his different viewpoint.

    Naturally, they are some on BU who will describe my tactics as provoking, nitpicking, or sniping. I respect their viewpoint also and am willing to receive whatever licks they want to give me. All of this must be expected once you enter the realm of public education, my friend.

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Hal Austin November 26, 2017 at 1:59 PM
    “If taxpayers’ money was to be invested it shou8ld have been on a debt for equity basis. None of these seem to be the case.
    This I suggest is further evidence of NIS incompetence; it is also a reason to question the professional integrity of Dr Robinson, since if he objected to lending this money and it was forced through by the politicians he should have resigned immediately.
    If it was a policy that he agreed with, then he owns the Barbadian public an explanation, and even more an apology.
    To discuss the NIS as if it is fit for purpose is disingenuous since it is not. We need tro go back o basics and start again..”

    Well put, Hal!

    We know you don’t need any validation from the anonymice but we must give academic Jack his intellectual jacket when he deserves to wear it.

    Commonsense still has a place in your heart.

    Dr. JR’s tenure in the Chair has made as much difference to the effective functioning of the NIS as Dr. Worrell’s stint at the CBB to the management of the Bajan economy.

    Just a waste of academic energy in the real world of business where acumen and perspicacity are the parents of commonsense.

    It therefore stands to reason that we ought to stop putting square academic pegs in round business holes and break that recurring decimal of the Peter Principle.

    But there will always be exception to the rule.
    Take Jeff C., for example.
    We ought to utilize his gift of commonsense and academic achievements to create a synergy of managerial infusion fit for purpose in the tough world of business.

    Why not let him sit in the Chair of the NIB? Then we might see some positive difference in the functioning of that strategically important national financial institution.

    Like

  • Actually, whether NIS remains in the Public Service or not is not the issue.
    The ONLY issue is really intelligent governance, and a commitment to merit.

    CLICO was not in the Public Service…..

    Like

  • Well Well @ Cut and Paste @ Your Service

    ` They intend to prolong the current economic system , with the occasional window dressing and superficial nonsense for as long as they can, knowing full well that we will be left to scramble for the collar and tie jobs while young people , in other countries are going to work in expensive jeans and are already millionaires.

    We have been reduced to pseudo intellectuals and nothing more. Many of our children will be without the skills to challenge the new technological economic order and the day will come when they will have MBAs but are maids and porters….`

    while you are perfectly right in putting the blame where it belongs…the ministers should be in prison for allowing it to happen….

    …..Ronald Jones had the opportunity to effectively utilize exhibition/schoars from 2010…given the world of new technology those who left the island have been exposed to…..

    ..they could have done wonders for the economy in the last 7 years, but the ministers are all too busy playing petty yardfowl politics and yardboys and yardgirls for the few…

    …a 7-10 year opportunity wasted.

    Like

  • @BT
    “You now trashed the private sector…”
    now? This has been his lament forever.

    Like

  • I respect Mr Blackman’s scholarship but Mr Franklyn’s views are absolutely correct. Once a well managed scheme with up to date monthly,quarterly and annual administrative and financial reports until the degree people took over along with the usual political interference although it is my view as well that certain political decisions in 1981 which impacted on the accounting for the various funds and investments did add to the confusion.

    Like

  • @ Charles
    Those seem to be Walter’s views too..
    Question is – what can be done to guarantee that even if we manage to fix the problem again, some pack of idiots won’t just come and mash um up in ten years time…?

    Like

  • Hal Austin November 26, 2017 at 1:59 PM #
    “@Walter
    We need to hypothecate the various functions of the scheme, separating out the welfare function from the long-term savings function.
    With the latter, we need to introduce a compulsory savings plan…”

    Hal,
    In order not to become a ward on society in his retirement years, the individual is supposed to position himself where he can reap the benefits of a three-pronged approach: NIS, personal savings, and employer provided pensions.

    Under the current NIS, high income individuals give up some of the returns that ought to come their way (individual equity), so that the low income workers can be provided with a deemed minimum level of retirement income (social adequacy).

    You seem to be suggesting that the total contributions paid into the NIS on behalf of a worker should be bifurcated so as to provide two type of benefits:
    1. A mimimum floor of income (using the existing NIS social adequacy approach)
    2. An account with accumulated contributions and investment returns based on the contributions made for each worker (individual equity).

    The approach you suggest is worthy of consideration.

    Like

  • David November 26, 2017 at 1:29 PM #
    “@Walter

    This is a serious matter. Does Walter Maloney sit on the NIS Board? Is he a talk show host on public media outlet? Personal integrity is something we need to hold people to account.”

    David,
    Woooo beck……
    Wait a minute. I was kidding around before so let me sit up straight and take this matter seriously. The way you want me to.

    “Does Walter Maloney sit on the NIS Board?”
    The last time I checked the NIS website, it listed nine members of the NIS Board. Mr. Maloney was not one of the nine.

    “Is he a talk show host on public media outlet?”
    Yes. He co-hosts the Walter.2 programme with me on CBC TV8, and 100.7 FM radio. The show is aired from 11 a.m. until 1 p.m. on Sundays.

    “Personal integrity is something we need to hold people to account.”
    I agree with you, but I am finding it extremely difficult to make a connection between this statement and the two questions above.

    I have known Walter Maloney since we were “little boys in Khaki” at Combermere. I will forever vouch for his personal integrity until credible evidence is produced to make me do otherwise.

    As Winston J Messiah used to say: “I sincerely hope that I have helped you.”

    Like

  • @Walter,
    Thanks for thinking my recommendation worthy of consideration. But it is more complex and cutting edge than that.
    Yes, a bifurcated fund, but with the social welfare arm being means tested. The principle behind it is that of the social safety net.
    The long-term savings arm would be compulsory, starting at about 5 per cent of the worker’s pay packet, rising to 20 per cent within five years.
    (Some time ago I appeared on BBC Radio Five Live with Steve Webb, who later became pensions minister, and David Willetts, now head of the Resolution Foundation think-tank but at the time Shadow Pensions minister for the Tories. I said then that workers should be compelled to save 20 per cent of their income and was shouted down. Now a number of leading UK pensions voices are suggesting the same).
    Any how, the investment mechanism for the fund would be separate and independent of government, which must be written in to the legislation. I would like to see the creation of a Sovereign Wealth Fund, which would manage the fund.
    There will be four intervention points for which the beneficiaries could withdrawn up to 20 per cent of their savings (and which must be repaid within five years) – to pay university fees; marriage; to buy a home; and at the point of death.
    But before its introduction, however, a widespread public debate is very important. My apologies for mentioning maths to you, but consider the average beneficiary: leaving university at age 22; 40 years’ contributions; retirement at age 67; and retirement for an average of 20 to 30 years.
    It is a big responsibility and a policy that cannot be changed every time the government changes, so we must get it right.
    An occupational pension scheme, which would also be compulsory, is separate.
    But Walter, it is a big task and not one that untrained politicians or generalist civil servants should be allowed to design or manage on their own.

    Like

  • charles skeete November 27, 2017 at 11:33 AM #
    “… it is my view as well that certain political decisions in 1981 which impacted on the accounting for the various funds and investments did add to the confusion.”

    The NIS was set up to provide statutory benefits to participants, BASED ON THE PAYMENT OF CONTRIBUTIONS.
    Old age pensions, paid to Barbadians age 65 and over who were not entitled to receive monthly pensions from NIS, were appropriately paid and administered by the government’s Welfare department.
    For reasons known only to himself, Tom Adams moved the administration of these old age pensions from the Welfare department and inappropriately placed them under NIS, where they were given the oxymoronic title of “Non-contributory pensions”.

    Like

  • Hal Austin November 27, 2017 at 2:15 PM #
    “@Walter,
    My apologies for mentioning maths to you…..”

    Hal,
    You don’t have to apologize for mentioning maths to me.
    I took the 11+ exam at ten years old, and before then, I had mastered fractions and decimals.

    LOL

    PS: I will take a closer look at the ideas you have put forward after lunch.

    Like

  • @Walter

    You promised to check if Walter 2 paid the cellphone bill.

    On Monday, 27 November 2017, Barbados Underground wrote: >

    Like

  • David November 27, 2017 at 5:02 PM #
    “@Walter

    You promised to check if Walter 2 paid the cellphone bill”

    David,
    Huh?

    Two simple observations have stirred my sixth sense to the point where I believe that something is amiss:
    1. I made that promise to you just yesterday. I have not done or said anything to justify this terse reminder.
    2. When juxtaposed with the previous comment and questions you directed at me at 1:29 pm yesterday, this is a non sequitur. Your last two attempts at communicating with me, when combined, make no sense whatsoever.

    I have known Walter Maloney practically all of my life, and as I have said before, I can vouch for his personal integrity. I do not know you. I cannot vouch for yours.

    Given your puzzling behaviour, I have decided to build a wall of protective silence around this issue,

    Like

  • @walter

    Sorry but we don’t play games. You promised to ask Walter, a person we hazard to guess you have on Whatsapp or in your contact list. You vouching for Walter Maloney’s integrity is irrelevant. Caswell has posted exhaustively on the issue of Maloney’s abuse of his mobile phone as president. It behooves him to clarify the matter. You can build a wall around the matter if you wisk, it simply means BU will continue to ask the question of cellphone bills until clarified.

    Like

  • David November 27, 2017 at 6:55 PM #
    ‘@walter
    Sorry but we don’t play games…….
    Caswell has posted exhaustively on the issue of Maloney’s abuse of his mobile phone as president. It behooves him to clarify the matter.”

    David,
    Like you, I do not play games.

    It behooves you to get your answers from Caswell.

    Like

  • @Walter

    Have to record that your response to a simple inquiry whether Walter Maloney repaid cellphone debt he was accused of running up as president of the NUPW is strange but it is your right. We will pursue the matter via other channels.

    Like

  • @ David,

    Walter Blackman wrote ” I have known Walter Maloney since we were “little boys in Khaki” at Combermere.
    I will forever vouch for his personal integrity until credible evidence is produced to make me do otherwise.”

    Real real friends protect each other for as long as possible. lol

    Like

  • David November 27, 2017 at 7:14 PM #
    “@Walter
    Have to record that your response to a simple inquiry…….. is strange but it is your right.”

    David,
    Thank you very much for understanding.
    My name was never linked to this issue. It is best that we keep it that way.

    Like

  • “Walter Blackman November 27, 2017 at 2:24 PM #
    charles skeete November 27, 2017 at 11:33 AM #
    “… it is my view as well that certain political decisions in 1981 which impacted on the accounting for the various funds and investments did add to the confusion.”

    The NIS was set up to provide statutory benefits to participants, BASED ON THE PAYMENT OF CONTRIBUTIONS.
    Old age pensions, paid to Barbadians age 65 and over who were not entitled to receive monthly pensions from NIS, were appropriately paid and administered by the government’s Welfare department.
    For reasons known only to himself, Tom Adams moved the administration of these old age pensions from the Welfare department and inappropriately placed them under NIS, where they were given the oxymoronic title of “Non-contributory pensions”.”

    I see nothing wrong with that. In my view that was a master stroke even though it was never a big charge to the consolidated fund anyhow because of the purported means testing and people found it infradig to go and line up for the pittance as well. Me and my bosom pal coming from school used to hide from our school mates when we stopped off in the welfare office in Country road opposite the NHC to draw our grandmothers’ pittance.In addition, when Mr Adams incorporated the welfare benefit into the NIS he increased the contribute rate albeit marginally and in later years made it inaccessible to those who could not prove why they did not contribute to the scheme. Problems with the financials began in 1981 with the sudden introduction of the health and transport levies and no proper accounting system in place to accomodate the transactions in the records.

    Like

  • Dr. Simple Simon Phd.

    @Hal Austin November 27, 2017 at 2:15 PM “There will be four intervention points for which the beneficiaries could withdrawn up to 20 per cent of their savings (and which must be repaid within five years)
    ONE: to pay university fees
    TWO: marriage
    THREE: to buy a home
    FOUR: at the point of death.

    I am surprised that you did not include reproduction as one of the intervention points, since no pension fund can survive without the production of new young contributors. Surely child bearing and child rearing are as important, perhaps more important than university education, marriage, and house buying. And surely newborns are much more in need of money than dead people.

    Like

  • Dr. Simple Simon Phd.

    @William Skinner November 26, 2017 at 1:22 PM “These are mainly people who inherited wealth and carry a very negative opinion of the working class.”

    People who inherited their money having a negative opinion of people who actually WORK for theirs.

    Irony of ironies.

    We then lets take away their inherited wealth, after all they did not WORK for it, and then we can see how well they will get long when like me they have to start their adult lives with exactly zero/0 in their pockets.

    The we will see who is smart and hard working.

    Like

  • Dr. Simple Simon Phd. November 28, 2017 at 10:11 PM #

    Reproduction is important, but not key to a long-term savings plan. I will like to see families with more than two children losing benefits.

    Like

  • ” As a country, Barbados is now unable to withstand the slightest scrutiny by independent international agencies. “……..” Public administration in our country has become so woeful and pathetic that, according to Morneau Shepell Ltd, ”

    Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer is calling on federal Finance Minister Bill Morneau to

    resign amid questions about alleged ethical lapses. ( but that is just politics )

    So who is scrutinizing the independent international agencies ?????

    Like

  • Dr. Simple Simon Phd. November 28, 2017 at 10:19 PM #

    Chuckle…..yup……animal farm……why dont you learn from history…..power/wealth corrupts, absolute power/wealth corrupts absolutely.

    It does matter who has the wealth if it is a fool they will loose it and if they have sense they will protect it unto death.

    Like

  • Hal Austin November 26, 2017 at 1:59 PM #

    The single biggest contributor to the downward slide and decline of Barbados, as a nation, is the misallocation of its human resources. From top to bottom, in private and public, we see and feel the deleterious effects of persons holding critical positions who have no basic understanding of what their roles are, and who are far less interested in knowing how to perform them.
    @Walter
    In simple language, this is called incompetence, one of the biggest causes of the decline of the nation as you rightly point out. But it is not the biggest.
    In the case of the NIS, the need for up-to-date technology with competent staff is a good starting point. However, the hybrid NIS is not fit for purpose.
    No matter how competent the staff, the professional integrity of the chairman and board, and the humility of the politicians, the scheme is a misfit for a modern economy.
    We need to hypothecate the various functions of the scheme, separating out the welfare function from the long-term savings function.
    With the latter, we need to introduce a compulsory savings plan (Chile did this in 1981 and the rest of the civilised world has followed). Let us have a national discussion about long-term savings (by calling it pensions it puts off young people), before designing an appropriate scheme.
    In terms of the present scheme, its investment policy exposes the enormous ignorance not only of the people running the scheme, but of those who want to intervene (politicians and the public intellectuals).
    I am not yet convinced that Dr Robinson knows anything about the practicality of investment, even though he may have the paper qualifications. If he does, he is hiding it very well.
    Recently he indicated that the poor return on investments is due to the underperformance of the markets, and was allowed to get away with such patent nonsense.
    I wrote an outline of awn asset allocation policy, which is still legitimate and which I stand by. But, typically, only one fool became involved to question my reference to ETFs; it was the same person that said that Logic was not central to philosophy, so did not matter.
    Dr Robinson, however, need to explain why, for the period up to the end of June, the S&P 500, the world’s leading market, has made returns of 17.9 per cent, 14.6 per cent and 7.2 per cent for the one, five and ten years respectively.
    This clearly indicates to me, that such returns in a global low-interest environment must be blamed at the asset allocation policies of the scheme.
    My suggestion is Dr Robinson must lift the bonnet and get his hands dirty, having a theoretical knowledge of the global investment markets is not enough. Does he have regular client/adviser meetings with Oppenheimer? If so, what are the outcomes? Publish them on the NIS website.
    Dr Robinson and his colleagues should also look at the index tracking of some leading endowment funds, which are making spectacular, if slightly less stellar, returns.
    Finally, let me go back o an issue we discussed some time ago. If COW Williams, or Apes Hill or any of his companies approached the NIS for funding, the obvious questions is why?
    This presumably is a commercial operation and should be measured as such, not just by look at the balance sheet, but as all good financial analysts do, by also looking beyond the balance sheet.
    First, if a commercial company needs funding, it should go to the markets, either banks, non-banks, issuing shares and bonds or raising the funding privately.
    If taxpayers’ money was to be invested it shou8ld have been on a debt for equity basis. None of these seem to be the case.
    This I suggest is further evidence of NIS incompetence; it is also a reason to question the professional integrity of Dr Robinson, since if he objected to lending this money and it was forced through by the politicians he should have resigned immediately.
    If it was a policy that he agreed with, then he owns the Barbadian public an explanation, and even more an apology.
    To discuss the NIS as if it is fit for purpose is disingenuous since it is not. We need tro go back o basics and

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s