The following was posted as a comment to Time to hold NIS Chairs accountable by BU Commenter NorthernObserver
Since I contributed several times on the NIS, I must admit when I make a mistake. For some time I have used the number of $320,000,000 to represent the sum of NIS contributions deducted from govt/SOE employees but not remitted to the NIS, by that employer(s), pre 2018. That was incorrect. The actual number given by the PM is $457,500,000.
I have also stated that was a criminal act. That nothing in the National Insurance Act gave any employer the right to withhold from the NIS monies it deducted from its employees. The PM referred to this as “monies it {GoB} took on trust”. Apparently whether employers have the legal right to withhold and open Accounts Payable (on trust) to the NIS, the PM is willing to give the GoB “a pass”. As she was willing to do with other employers, just admit it and talk to the NIS. In context, this seems to be because a decision was taken to pay it back, and she was clear to state the full amount of $457,500,000 had been repaid via Bonds. She said series Series B, I thought it was Series J, doesn’t much matter.
This then created the peculiar situation where it was OK to write off $1.3B in Bonds, but not $457.5M in unremitted contributions, which was repaid in Bonds, as if, the source of the money in both cases were not the same employee/employer remittances? The caveat being, the GoB will attempt to recapitalize both the NIS and the CBB as it can afford to do so.
The PM also mentioned that certain talk regarding investments was “foolishness” because the NIS has Investment Guidelines. The actual term until now has been an IPS, an Investment Policy Statement, and for the record it WAS NOT followed, and that is how the NIS ended up with a mountain of GoB Debt as ‘assets’. Investment Guidelines or policies, are of NO VALUE is they are not followed, and there are NO CONSEQUENCES to those who decide NOT to follow them. Hence, anybody who has concerns about ‘Investments’ is not without some just cause.
The PM also stressed the importance of the tri-annual Actuarial Report (likened to a medical check-up), while claiming the NIS was now current up to 2015, even though those annual reports have not yet been made public. She continued down the now well worn path of using the accrual accounting versus cash accounting method as the cause. However, said some modifications were being implemented so audits could be completed “in a hurry”. I have some difficulty believing it has taken them 5 years to arrive at this solution. It is interesting, that reports of a similar vintage from both the Caves, and then the BTMI did not mention this accounting dilemma, BUT, that information could not be found. Accountants could not verify/qualify that for which there was no tangible record.
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.