Since the tortuous FNPF reform began six months ago, the Fund’s CEO Mr Aisake Taito has shown himself to be a Grandmaster of misinformation, confusion and contradiction.
Many pensioners now take most of what he has to say on their FNPF payments and the Fund, with a ladle of salt. By a process of contagion, FNPF itself is also viewed with skepticism. It too cannot be trusted.
The plain truth is that neither management nor the board can get their story straight.
Let us relook at just two of Mr Taito’s recent assertions which reinforce perfectly his credibility problem.
In the light of these statements by Mr Taito, comments in the FNPF’s notorious and mean FNPF Transition Decree require very close scrutiny. Bear in mind these must have been approved by the board.
About two weeks ago Mr Taito said the FNPF was in crisis. Inexcusably Mr Taito did not spell out the precise nature of this. He left fund members to ponder nervously on his meaning. What was the danger? Was the FNPF unstable and ready to collapse? Had another of its investments failed, leading to a heavy loss? Perhaps he was referring to the FNPF’s decision to default on legally secured payments to pensioners? For that is certainly a crisis.
There was no clarification. The crisis evaporated and Mr Taito quickly moved on.
He then decided that the FNPF was acting from a position of strength. As Greybeard has said, this unmistakably projected the FNPF as well able to meet its commitments, including payment of existing contracted pensions. Indeed it has said on numerous occasions that it can continue as it is presently structured for another 40 to 45 years. By that time the pensioners whose lives are being violated and ripped apart now will have been with their Maker for a long time.
Now turn to part 2, clause 4 of the abhorrent Transition Decree. After stating that the current pension arrangements cannot be sustained, it says they “create funding shortfalls with the associated risk of insolvency.”
So the FNPF is taking us back into crisis mode. Mr Taito’s position of strength no longer applies.
The relevant wording of the Decree is in the present tense. That can only point to a clear and present danger of insolvency. For insolvency read bankrupt.
So FNPF where are we? Crisis and collapse or financial strength?
The overarching question is why we have to tolerate such patent inconsistencies from our pension fund, its management and board? This comes down to massive failure of corporate governance by an organisation which bizarrely holds itself up as a model for others. The FNPF is in a complete state of self-delusion. Now, that is a crisis along with the pension default.