NAPSA PARTIAL PENSION: WHAT I KNOW AND WHERE WE’VE COME FROM
…Please, read this carefully to argue from an informed position.
By CHARLES CHISALA
THE fact that it has divided the nation speaks volumes. The decision by the New Dawn government to implement the policy of allowing workers to access their pension before retiring is the bull elephant in the room.
Those who are supporting the policy have been savagely mauling anyone with a different view.
Eminent economists Lubinda Habazoka and Chibamba Kanyama, and opposition politician Sean Tembo have been victims of cruel trolling and dragging on social media at the hands of government supporters, some corporate communication practitioners and mostly prospective beneficiaries of the reform for merely offering their expert opinions.
Whether it is good or bad does not mater to me because I am peacefully enjoying my full life pension which comes in form of a monthly salary. It can’t buy me a private jet but it is enough to meet the basic needs of my family. I can’t complain.
I just want to contribute to the debate by sharing what I know so that people can engage from an informed perspective.
Reforming the country’s social security policy and legal frameworks to make them more responsive to present circumstances and meet the evolving needs of pensioners was one of the top priorities of the Patriotic Front (PF) party’s manifesto while in opposition. It was one of its leader late Michael Chilufya Sata’s campaign promises before the 2011 general elections.
After winning the elections Mr Sata wanted his promise to be immediately implemented.
In 2013 a technical team headed by then Ministry of Labour and Social Security permanent secretary Trevor Kaunda was appointed to develop a communication strategy for the national pension reforms.
I was in the media sub-team with seasoned journalist Berry Lwando. Our task was to craft an effective national communication campaign aimed at educating citizens on the long-term benefits of the reforms. Instead of getting a lump sum of their pension as had been the case pensioners would be receiving a monthly salary for the rest of their lives.
The PF government had come up with a two-tier system where employees would be required to make monthly contributions to a statutory (compulsory) pension scheme (NAPSA) and an optional scheme under which they could access their benefits while they were still in employment.
They could use the money to build a house, start a business or invest in education without tampering with their life pension at NAPSA because it was for their survival after leaving employment.
To come up with these reforms the government had appointed a technical team which had travelled to various countries within Africa, in Europe, United States and other parts of the world. The aim was to study their pension schemes, look at the best practices and make recommendations to the government on a system that could be most beneficial to the Zambian worker.
The team also toured Zambia widely to obtain an empirical picture of the living conditions of pensioners. The reforms Mr Sata’s administration was introducing were a response to the recommendations contained in the technical team’s report.
In the National Pension Reforms Communication Strategy Technical Team Mr Lwando was responsible for electronic media while I was in charge of the print media component. We were therefore privileged to have access to the report. One of the key findings was that the system of giving lump sums upon retirement had wrought havoc on the lives of pensioners and their families.
Many cases had been cited in the report. Many Zambian pensioners had been investing their lump some benefits in businesses when they had never done any business before. As a result, the businesses collapsed leaving them without an income to survive on.
Some had used their pension to build houses. In some cases, the house construction project would gobble the entire pension creating a situation where the pensioner and their family had a house to live in but without an income to live on.
In fact, in many cases the money finished when the house was only at window or roof level. Even after selling the incomplete house the family remained without a source of livelihood. It did not help matters.
Yet some recklessly squandered their entire pension on self-indulgence and ended up without any money to survive on. Many of these pensioners became destitute and ended up either losing their mental balance, dying of depression or committing suicide leaving behind widows, widowers and orphans.
Without any means of survival many pensioners and beneficiaries became a burden on the government. Social cash transfer and food security packs became their sole source of survival. This put unnecessary pressure on the national Treasury.
In the years the monthly salary pension regime has been in operation pensioners have had a reliable source of survival because they are assured of an income every month despite being unemployed.
We are now partially reverting o the old regime that existed before the PF ascended to power because almost every eligible worker will be queuing for their partial pension. This will reduce their monthly life pension after retirement.
President Hakainde Hichilema had promised that his government would reform the national social security system so that workers could withdraw part of their pension from NAPSA instead of waiting until they retire. Like Mr Sata Mr Hichilema is merely fulfilling his promise to the voters.
However, it has raised a tempest and left the country rent in the middle. Two extreme camps have emerged: those in support and those who are against the reform.
We need a sober, intelligent debate in the interest of posterity. It is important for both sides to listen to each other and not bully those who don’t agree with us.
So far, most of the arguments I have seen on social media have been based on emotions and not reason. In the end it will be up to an individual worker to decide, although the lure of cash is almost irresistible.
My advice is that we look back at history and see what lessons it can teach us. It is for the good of our nation.