MLA urges pension raid to reset ‘ridiculous’ system

| 26/04/2020 | 89 Comments
Cayman News Service
Chris Saunders in Legislative Assembly

(CNS): Opposition MLA Chris Saunders (BTW) made a powerful argument on Thursday for everyone who has a private pension to raid it following changes to the law. He said that such a move might be the catalyst needed to reform the current “ridiculous system”. Saunders said he had never heard anyone who was satisfied with their pension, as he urged government to face the fact that system doesn’t work.

The debate on changes to the National Pensions Law to provide a holiday from mandated payments into funds by employers and workers, along with the ability to withdraw significant amounts of cash, dominated the proceedings in the Legislative Assembly.

With the exception of North Side MLA Ezzard Miller, who proposed an alternative idea to give people money during this challenging time, all legislators supported the move.

Saunders said he supported people being allowed to access their own money, given the lack of alternatives open to them in such an expensive place to live, when government was not going to be able to support everyone. But he also indicated that this was a chance for the people to force an overhaul of a failing system.

“Lets be honest… the pension system that we have right now isn’t working,” he said as he emphasized his own individual view of the situation. “This is one of the first steps in dismantling the system that ain’t working.”

He said that, given modern mortality rates, there was no way that anyone could fund an adequate retirement on a regular salary by putting 10% of their salary into a fund, when they are kicked out of the workforce at 65.

“We need to start looking at restructuring the entire pension system in this country, ” he said, noting that having nine pension providers for such a small workforce was “ridiculous” and pointing to the high fees being taken by administrators as well. “I am fully supporting this as I believe the money is better off in the people’s hands than in some of these pension providers that we have.”

He said that, given the uncertainties we are all facing, it made no sense for people to be begging money and borrowing when they were sitting on money that they could use. Saunders said he welcomed the “bold” move by government to allow people to take as much as they have with this amendment to the law.

Although there have been some dissenting voices, the decision has been broadly welcomed by the public. Private pension holders will now be able to access up to CI$10,000 in a lump sum and then a further 25% of the remaining amount of their fund.

See MLA Saunders’ contribution to the debate below on CIGTV:


Share your vote!


How do you feel after reading this?
  • Fascinated
  • Happy
  • Sad
  • Angry
  • Bored
  • Afraid
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: , , , ,

Category: Laws, Politics

Comments (89)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    The pension law was Ezzard Miller’s baby – or should I say folly? I believe it was a good idea on paper, a way of preventing a whole generation of Caymanians from becoming drains on the government. Gone are the days when most Caymanians look after their elderly until they die. Some do, as they should, but the majority don’t give a crap. Ask anyone who has delivered Meals on Wheels what they have seen. Most young people are just out for themselves (and they’re often the ones clamouring to let COVID-19 rip through the community, so what if it kills a bunch of old people. Those old folks had their time and are close to death, they reason, so let them die so I can inherit their wealth). Sorry folks, that’s what it’s come to. Maybe Ezzard saw it coming. But Ezzard was conned. He, who sees an expat conspiracy to take advantage of Caymanians around every corner, didn’t see this coming. He didn’t see that pension providers would basically rape the pension funds with high fees and dangerous investments, or that they would hire criminals to oversee them (well, at least one was a proven lawbreaking criminal, the others are just moral criminals). I could have put my money in a bank certificate of deposit and earned more over the past 20 years – this despite and unprecedented bull market. There have been some years where it made money, but most years, it hasn’t. Volatility basically disappeared for many years recently, but not in my pension account. I feel like it’s a spin of a roulette wheel every time I open a statement. And because of my age, I was supposedly on the conservative plan! Sorry Ezzard, nice try, but I’m going with Chris Saunders on this one!

    8
    2
  2. Anonymous says:

    I spoke to my pension company in the beginning of the year, requesting they that change my plan to a conservative plan as I didn’t feel comfortable with the current (aggressive) plan. They told me I wasn’t allowed to dictate where and how my money was invested. Had they done that, I would have saved 20-30% of my pension.

    9
    1
    • Anonymous says:

      Yep, the current pension law dictates the general investment criteria, I think it was 60pct in stocks, 40pct in cash equivalents, or something like that. It means even if you do see rough seas ahead you just have to blindly sail into the storm. Out of the money options can be a cheap way to limit the downside risk, but I don’t know if the law allows for them, or if the plan can’t be bothered with them, as it does mean they will underperform the benchmarks.

  3. Anonymous says:

    What hasn’t been mentioned and I’m surprised is the many expats that have no pension because their employer didn’t put it into a pension provider. However they did take it out of the alarm. What of those people who have no money to withdraw?

    5
    2
    • Anonymous says:

      Thats a different, albeit it related, subject. Employers not making the contributions after deducting from staff is as old as…well the Pension Law. The legislation change may possibly bring more of this to the surface (“The tide is out let’s see who’s swimming naked”) but that is a different matter to what is right and wrong with the current pension system and plans.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Offer your suggestions for change MLA Saunders. Do no simply say the current system is NOT WORKING.
    Folks if you take it all please remember to visit MLA Saunders if you run into trouble when you retire. Obviously with his higher financial abilities he will be able to assist you.

    25
    16
    • Anon says:

      1.49pm Join the Civil Service.

      9
      5
      • Anonymous says:

        Anon. Any change you will at some point understand that MLA’S are not civil servants. Please engage brain.

        1
        2
    • Anonymous says:

      re: Anonymous 27/04/2020 @1.49 pm
      MLA Saunders has not offered an alternative Pension Plan but he acknowledges there are serious problems with the existing Pension Plans for Cayman.
      I would have been shocked if he or anyone else could come up with a better plan or policy in a short missive or in a few comments.
      I do not know what the best strategy is either but this current Cayman Pension plan is not for everyone. It may prove to be a suitable additional retirement income for for those who currently earn over $100,000 a year but those people are in the minority of the work force, and will prove to be the least needy at retirement age.

      There is always a way to improve everything, we just got to keep working until there is a breakthrough

  5. Two Cents says:

    Let me start by saying how grateful I am for CIG-TV making the proceedings of the LA available online and allowing us to watch and listen to debates at our convenience. It is genuinely helpful, not least because it allows you to pause and get yourself together when you have heard all that you can tolerate for one time. I had to take a few breaks while listening to the debate on the National Pensions (Amendment) Bill 2020.
    While the empathy of legislators for those who have been adversely impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic was to be expected, I could not help but notice the obvious lack of interest that legislators have had in the matter of pensions over recent years. For example, it was pointed out by one member that the Minster responsible (currently the Premier) hasn’t tabled an annual report for the National Pensions Office in over 10 years – but no one has noticed and the Premier in his winding up, didn’t even give an undertaking to address it. It is also a fact that the law was substantially amended in 2016 but there is no revised version of the law that members of the public and legislators can read to see what is the current law. Yet several legislators took the opportunity, including MLA Saunders, to express their dissatisfaction with the law, but none said anything about their efforts to address these problems which simply shouldn’t exist.
    While most members conveyed the view that they appreciate that pensions are not meant to be used for ‘rainy days’ or unforeseen circumstances, only MLA Miller tried to convey a proposal that would have provided the desired assistance for individuals without reducing their pension holdings. Kudos to Minister Rivers for her attempt to illustrate the impact of pension withdrawals at this time.
    I had expected that the Premier in presenting the bill would have mentioned the considerations that the government had made prior to deciding that they couldn’t help and people would need to hit up their pensions. When he didn’t, I figured surely the Minister of Finance was going to speak and he would deal with this. In fact, MLA Saunders even gave him a big thank you for his oversight of the proposal and that of the competent entities and public officers under him. Not a word from Minister McTaggart however. I can only conclude that he and his staff hadn’t exercised the overview that MLA Saunders gave him credit for, and he couldn’t speak without telling MLA Saunders ‘you’re welcome’, so he couldn’t open his mouth. I am reminded of his contribution to the referendum law debate when all he could say was that the government was getting a fantastic deal but didn’t quote one number to substantiate his view. For a man who made a good living crunching numbers and convincing clients why numbers matter, he has been a huge disappointment.
    And I say that in the context that there is currently a report in the public domain https://tinyurl.com/y97dyc7c carried out by a local firm on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce which seeks to analyse the impact on the labour force. For the government to not bring anything to the table to substantiate how they had considered this is really poor. Obviously, they couldn’t reference their approach of offering no help and rather giving people access to their own pensions to any other country because no other country is doing this. And it’s even more despicable when one hears the Minister of Financial Services state that they were cruising along at the beginning of the year with healthy reserves, very low debt-servicing obligations and a stable credit rating (affirmed on 13 Apr by Moody’s as AA3).
    Surely the government could have produced some analysis showing different levels of government contribution and in turn corresponding lower levels of pensions which individuals would need to have to draw out at this time. And no, no one would expect the government to fund the national payroll but the reality is not everyone is not working or at risk. Yet, according to Minster Rivers, it was just ‘too cumbersome’ to not give everyone access to their pensions regardless of whether they’re still employed or not. Really! Has the government not heard of an ‘employment letter’ or a ‘no longer employed letter’?
    Before I wind up, I should add that it would have been good to see that legislators having experienced the devastation of Covid-19 would have also recognised that the provision that they made in the Disaster Preparedness & Hazard Management Law 2016 for a National Disaster Fund is grossly inadequate. Committing to set aside $400,000 per annum from a $1B budget won’t get it done. It will take us 25 years to have $10M in the fund and we should all appreciate how inadequate that is now. I look forward to hearing that the annual contribution to the National Disaster Fund is increased to 1% of the budget, or $10M per year.
    Finally, I was saddened by the lack of basic business acumen and common sense demonstrated in this whole exercise. Surely there are individuals who need assistance and they should receive it. But this open house on what legislators 25 years ago recognised as a facility that was genuinely needed for the well-being of our citizens when they reach their golden years was not the way to go. Sadly, we have to raise our game substantially in how we deal with the adversities that life will inevitably throw at us.

    27
    6
    • Anonymous says:

      Two cents. Who could have been called 10 cents if you had offered a solution.

      I

      13
      6
    • Anonymous says:

      Nicely said., indeed I agree that the Minister of Finance should have said why surplus and borrowing plus loans perhaps against pension balances couldnt be made. Indeed Chris is right 9 funds is 8 too many for such a small population and a contract with a NY or a Toronto based asset manager to handle the fund at 10th of the current admin fess need to be urgently addressed. Not urgent in their sense but Covid 19 speed.

      10
  6. Anonymous says:

    One step in the right direction would be to change the law so that the administrators only get paid a commission on the gains as opposed to a flat percentage regardless of how they perform. As it is now the administrators get paid no matter how bad the funds perform and therefore have little incentive to try and manage them well.

    98
    3
    • BeaumontZodecloun says:

      Absolutely agree. I’ve been saying the same for years. My own fund has lost thousands of dollars. I would have been money ahead to have put it in a Bustello Coffee can. … and yes, I have and am capable of saving on my own.

      It galls me to think that those that oversee the fund(s) make good money regardless of their performance. The thing was broken from the beginning. Invest it all in local utilities; they will be the last thing to fall, and if they do, the funds won’t matter.

      30
    • Anonymous says:

      But that is standard way all portfolio managers earn their income, per managed account balance every quarter so how would you get anyone certified/qualified to do this job if they cant earn standard fee…just asking. I dont disagree with you but its just not how the industry works.

      4
      6
  7. Anonymous says:

    The MLA workforce certainly isn’t being kicked out at 65…many in that room are still drawing salary and pension simultaneously. We pay twice, for half the required effort and faculties.

    68
    1
  8. Anonymous says:

    I been working without pension or insurance for the past 3 years just to be able to take a half decent pay check home.
    I always knew the pension and insurace companies are the biggest scammers and government give them the legal backing.

    48
    4
  9. Anonymous says:

    This may not be a popular argument but pensions here are actually important where there is no other old age benefit. Yes, most of the plans have underperformed, but despite the statements made by many commenters, they don’t lose your principal over long run. And they will give you something to retire with even if it’s not enough. Most people are irresponsible and even if you could earn better returns the chances of you having the discipline to not touch that money instead of, say, buying a car, or paying off credit card debt is low. Before you respond to me to say I am wrong and that you wouldn’t touch that money, ask yourself: do I have credit card debt? Do I borrow money at 20% interest? Some of you will say, of course not, that’s bad financial management. But keep in mind that nearly 2/3 of people do. Should they be trusted to save for retirement on their own? Many people live paycheck to paycheck.

    I am not saying that the system is perfect and couldn’t use some adjustment. But it does serve a greater good.

    58
    6
    • Anonymous says:

      Yes…..there are many persons that have to be forced to save. Lack of foresight and/or self control. Obviously, many people don’t save a damn penny outside of their pension or they wouldn’t need to be panicking about pension access before they even missed a paycheck!

      Although the pension system needs tweaking, it was a good move making it mandatory.

  10. M McLaughlin says:

    I have been paying into my pension since 1998, lets assume me and my employers over this period contributed $100k over 22 years, for arugment sake, this would be $378 every month for 22 years, then I would have $204k, if minister Rivers 6% assumption was possible, the problem is if I annualized my actual pension earnings over 22 years, it’s less than 1% per annum, which is shameful, take gold as an example over the last 15 years, it has increased in value by 270% or an average of 18% per annum. 

    Why cant I have the option to invest a portion of my pension in gold or silver, as a hedge against these market events?

    I agree 100% with people taking their pensions out of the casino and until the CI government addresses the fundamental issues with pensions, things wont improve as long as a large portion of our contributions are mandated by law to be invested in these volatile markets.

    Instead of getting up their on a high horse and patronizing people on the consequences of withdrawing their pension, do something to fixed the broken system, the Insurance companies the own the pension administrators are experts at creating products that offer fixed income over a period of time.

    Why should we allow our hard earned funds to be invested in the financial markets that continually have these market events, one year we gain 25% and the next year that gain its wiped out + 10% in less than one month.

    People wake up.

    59
    3
    • Anonymous says:

      The question to ask is, after the 22 years would you even have the $100K in a bank/investment account? Forget about any gains. Or would you have spent it over the 22 years and have zero/nill/zilch/nada to retire on??
      No pension is perfect. They would not be needed if WE would save for retirement ourselves.

      11
      4
      • Anonymous says:

        Must be the first and only financial product designed for the good of the people.

        2
        2
      • M McLaughlin says:

        1:45pm Let me make something clear I’m not against pensions, I’m against how they are administered presently as mandated by the law.

        I don’t want to be a burden on no government in the future, but there’s no way my pension will be adequately funded in 25 years under the present system.

        Less than 1% average return for 22 years won’t do it.

        Wake up!

        17
        • Anonymous says:

          Unless you are self employed you would have contributed 50% of that cash for 100% of the plan…I like my pension as my savings have to be matched by my employer (up to limits), and if they didn’t, I don’t believe they would just pay me the difference in higher pay.

    • Anonymous says:

      A couple points. The S&P500 produces an average annual return of something like 9-10 percent over a 90 year period. Now, pensions have to diversify and they have fees, they invest some money in fixed income and they hold some cash. So their returns will likely be lower. I am suprised your annual return only works out to 1% a year since 1998 – that is indeed bad performance.

      However, suggesting that you ought to be able to invest your pension in a single asset like gold is probably not a realistic alternative. What if people chose assets like cryptocurrency or oil. What if you had bought oil in 1998 because you figured we were getting close to “peak oil” which was a popular theory some 20 years ago. Now its something like 12 bucks a barrel.

      The point is, your pension plan is the conservative part of the portfolio. You should be making your risky investments with money you can afford to lose. If you are right in those big bets then there is your retirement. You talk about taking pensions out of the casino but you’re saying you’d rather take that money to the casino yourself. Investing in commodities is no less of a gamble.

      7
      1
      • M McLaughlin says:

        I prefer to take my chances on a proven tangible asset than some peice of worthless paper that says I own shares in Vanguard or Fidelity Funds.

        4
        1
        • Anonymous says:

          Well if you think that securities are worthless paper then probably not much anyone can do for you. Probably best to keep money under the mattress.

          3
          1
  11. Anonymous says:

    Buy bitcoin.

  12. Anonymous says:

    No one I know trust the pension plan. No one I know thinks that they will get all the money back ever. Except Bush. It is a scam and its time is up. Government has help set up the scam and is making money on it. Only they can stop it. So what’s it gonna be? Show everyone who you really work for. Yourselves or the people?

    43
    9
    • Anonymous says:

      How does government make money on private pension funds (Chamber/Silver Thatch/fidelity/British Caymanian etc)!

      6
      1
  13. Anonymous says:

    Time for income tax.

    12
    63
  14. Anonymous says:

    Whomever wishes to win the next election, make this a campaign promise.

    24
  15. Anonymous says:

    The key is that over a 10 year bull market, there will little to no gains. The ONLY ways that was possible is high fees and or poor management. Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t those the very traits that pensions were allegedly set up to combat? They are an absolute failure, for the contributors. 8 years ago, my 10 year old told me to buy Hasboro The price $36.00. Excluding dividends, the shares closed at $74.87 on Friday.

    34
    1
    • Anonymous says:

      people in Cayman have matured and we know about finance more than ever. We should be directing our investments not paying to support job creation to build more condos. 2 things government needs to look at ‘sustainable development’ so that older homes have a market and don’t become spoilt assets and derlict neighbourhood. And the pension system that is a small part of artificial job creation mechanism robbing savers of today to create article demand

      24
      • Anonymous says:

        It’s also come to light how this all started. Financial guys / friends coming together and convincing government it was a good idea particularly if they managed the investments. I can promise you, some people have done amazingly well with your money and mine. The charade needs to stop. People who save save. People who don’t simply won’t. At what point are persons responsible for their actions?Pensions are nothing but a legal scam.

        10
  16. Anonymous says:

    I agree with Chris. Why would someone contribute money each month into pension and lose on its interest, its best not to have one and its better to save that money yourself. Pirate pension companies is what they should all be called. Truth is they pay government high fee’s annually to rob people of their money and the judicial and government protect them. They have always been mobocracy….The MOB.

    34
    5
  17. Anonymous says:

    He isn’t wrong and to limit payments to 12k a year when drawing a pension of 500,000 is just stupid. You cannot live here on $1000 a month. They want to take your money, but not give it back. The returns on investment are poor as well. Let the people get their hard earned money to invest for themselves!

    56
    1
    • BeaumontZodecloun says:

      I frequently ask myself why the CIG Credit Union is still able to pay 5% interest in these volatile times. Is that something that could be expanded to be offered to all the residents of Cayman, or would it then lose it’s ‘magic’.

      I believe it is necessary to cause WP folk to contribute and have insurance, even the minimal insurance they currently get. I also believe it is somewhat of a travesty to require them to pay into a pension that is — by all appearances — like pulling your OWN teeth to acquire once a WP holder leaves our islands.

      5
      1
      • Anonymous says:

        They pay 5% because they get a Government subsidy.

        1
        2
        • Anonymous says:

          not. even. close. – There is no government subsidy.

          Credit Union pays dividends, not interest. (It also wasn’t 5% for many years during the recession.) They can pay a higher-than-savings-rate dividend because they are essentially paying ‘profit’ to the members (owners).

          Credit Union take in $1milion dollars in savings from members. Lend $1million dollars in loans to members (for cars, land, houses, etc.). Members repay $1million + 6% interest. Take 2% of the interest to run the company, pay the remaining 4% back to members as dividends (interest) on their savings. Individual member makes 4% dividend (interest) that year. That’s how the Credit Union pays such relatively high dividends on savings.
          N.B. The preceding numbers are grossly simplified to provide a simple answer to the original question.

          12
    • Anonymous says:

      I’m a strong saver. Many years I would strive to exceed my 5% contribution. No, I’m not some ‘rich expat’ but I would drive a nice used car and forgo the new BMW. Now I’m 65 yrs old and I’ll need to live to 150 in order to draw down MY pension by $12,000 a year. Bastards!

  18. Anonymous says:

    I remember many years ago challenging the poor performance of a major local pension scheme which gave me a year end statement which showed that I had less money in the plan than had actually been invested, because the plan took their fees before any investments were made! The response was that I had to remember that the employer was actually contributing so even if their returns were negative because the employer was investing an equal amount I would be in profit. So the bottom line was they (the pension plan) like the government didn’t have to perform…how public would bail them out!

    37
  19. Anonymous says:

    Now any change to our favourable and envious currency would be idiotic

  20. Anonymous says:

    And lets restructure the labor force while we are at it and stop importing poverty. Cayman Compass article on Filipinos proves this is a major issue.

    28
    16
    • Anonymous says:

      We don’t just import poverty, we give it status in breach of our own laws!

      10
      1
    • BeaumontZodecloun says:

      I just wandered all over the Compass looking for any story that might possibly mirror your assertation. Didn’t find a thing. Care to share?

      What is your solution? Deport all WP holders and watch business after business collapse because our own won’t fill those positions? As things stand now, WP holders are vital for the functioning of our economy.. Not saying that has to always be the case; 30 years ago, there were far fewer people here on Work Permit, and clerk, bartender, hospitality, dive, restaurant and others were largely filled by Caymanians.

      The WP holders are not the enemy. We need them, and should do all we can to help them right now. IMVHO.

      14
      2
      • Anonymous says:

        And your point is they all must be poor upon arrival?

        3
        1
        • BeaumontZodecloun says:

          I don’t think you meant to reply to me. If you did, my point is that WP holders are NOT the enemy; we cannot function without them. The person I was responding to said there was a Cayman Compass article that supported his claim that Filipinos are “importing poverty”. I want to see evidence, because what I see with my own eyes are hard-working people with a great work ethic and integrity who work hard for the benefit of their people back home. Amazing and laudable, and also quite a distance from “importing poverty”.

    • Anonymous says:

      Importing poverty? How about you work for their wage? Though so.

      5
      1
      • Anonymous says:

        That’s kind of the definition of importing poverty.

        5
        1
        • BeaumontZodecloun says:

          No, it is not. Importing poverty is people immigrating here that cannot pay for their own subsistence. EVERY. Single. Filipino on work permit here comes here at the request of a Caymanian. They work and live and don’t make a hell of a lot of money, but what they also don’t do is draw off the system as so many of our own able-bodied folk do.

  21. Anonymous says:

    I agree with Mr. Saunders that the current system is not working and that there is no way that anyone could fund an adequate retirement by putting 10% of their salary into a pension fund. The only people that truly benefit from the current arrangements are the pension administrators themselves. I support giving people access to 100% of their money. That said, there might need to be some restrictions on how the money is spent. People should be able to use their pension to start a business or pay off a mortgage. The unemployed should also be able to access the funds they need to avoid starvation and to keep their families safe.

    45
    4
    • Anonymous says:

      Is 10% contribution the maximum or minimum? When I lived there 20 years ago pensions hadn’t been mandatory very long. I remember putting in as much as my employer matched…..they were pretty generous with benefits.

      If it is a minimum, then it’s up to employees to put in whatever excess they can. Pensions are not meant to be a person’s sole entire retirement income. It’s also very important to save/invest aggressively outside of a retirement plan so you’ll have funds for emergencies and, ultimately, retirement.

  22. Anonymous says:

    He’s right. The pensions here suck. Then again, so do many personal finance products here too, bank accounts, Visa cards, loans etc are all terrible.

    71
    2
    • Anonymous says:

      Suggest you leave and pay your pension as taxes in your own country.

      1
      55
      • Anonymous says:

        Standard crab response.

        30
        3
      • Anonymous says:

        What a fool. Someone says, “We should have better clarity and better offerings on credit cards.” You say, “Go home with that kind of talk.”

        16
        • Anonymous says:

          Just out of interest what’s wrong with credit cards here? The UK average rate is just under 21%, US rate is somewhere in the 15-19% and about the same in Canada. I pay 15% here, at least I would if I carried a balance. I hate borrowing generally so try to save the money before I spend it. I would agree that ALL credit cards are a rip off, just not sure that they are especially bad here.

          6
          1
          • Anonymous says:

            The ones here don’t have fraud protection.. Well they do through Visa but many years banks here wouldn’t take that claim process on them as a service and so if you got fraudulent claim you were stuck.

            Can’t say if that still the position.. Once bitten twice shy.. Use US credit card if I need to

          • Anonymous says:

            I’m not looking at averages. They’re skewed by idiots with 400% APR deals. I was able to get 0% or extremely low % credit cards, with various incentives because I paid the balances in full, without fail.

      • BeaumontZodecloun says:

        Your response doesn’t help anything. What we are all (hopefully) trying to do here is identify problems, along with posing solutions. Mandatory pensions have been a problem since their inception. Agree?

        So, should they be shelved entirely with a new plan, or can this one be reworked. THAT is what we’re all talking about, and listen, if a person, Caymanian OR expat is forced to pay into something, then they damn well have a voice, and the right to criticise its administration.

      • Anonymous says:

        Your comment tis extremely unfair. It’s not a criticism of Caymanians. It’s a criticism of the poor financial products, which are often dictated somewhere else. For instance, I cannot believe a particular B of Bank gets away with the monthly fees it charges.

        11
    • Anonymous says:

      one at a time

    • Anonymous says:

      Yes we seem to have more bank fees. But what are the differences in credit cards, loans, etc.?

    • Anonymous says:

      To 9.34 Stop whining.

      1
      1
  23. Anonymous says:

    What the Govt. needs to do is amend the pensions law where any individual here on a work permit, the employer or the employee are not required to contribute pensions for. This will create a savings where the employer and employee can increase the rate required for Caymanians and residents from the mandatory 5%. If WORC functions as it was setup to do we should not have any issues whereby the private sector favors expat labor over Caymanians or residents because of savings on pensions payments.

    Also the only people who are making anything currently from these private pension funds are the fund administrators. Why not also mandate that at least 50% of pensions funds should be invested locally as appose to making all of our contributions leave the island. With all of the Govt. capital projects that are being completed why shouldn’t we insist that these funds stay here, by investing in Govt. projects.

    20
    24
    • Anonymous says:

      If you invest in government projects (assume you mean infrastructure improvement like the airport and buildings, like the JGH school) how do you liquidate to pay out pensions?

      10
      1
      • Anonymous says:

        I assume that the writer was referring to the funding aspects of the projects as the government normally borrows to pay for its many projects.

    • Anon says:

      Since far too many W/permit holders get Status them not paying Pension whilst on W/permit won’t work because they won’t have contributed yet we’ll ultmately have to take care of them and their offspring. One couple who got Status in 2003 had 16 kids and were the first ones in line demanding housing & othet benefits.

      4
      2
  24. Anonymous says:

    A very statesmen like speech! Thank you Chris for having calling the 9 private sector pensions too small.

    26
    3
  25. Anonymous says:

    Leaving aside the fees and poor performance of the pension fund, what really ticked me off is when they changed the law that took away access for those who leave after 1 year. The matching 5% and the idea that you could take the money after one year was an enticement to take up a job. It’s fine to change it going forward but it’s not correct to change the rules retroactively. That’s just plain wrong. That wasn’t the deal.

    46
    2
  26. MERVYN CUMBER says:

    Well said Chris!

    31
    5
  27. Anonymous says:

    Can’t wait to get it.

    19
  28. Anonymous says:

    My chamber pension is great anyone that says otherwise is totally ignorant about the pension plan It is the best preforming plan year over year and I
    currently have 4 to compare

    10
    25
    • Anonymous says:

      Good for you

      7
      1
    • Anonymous says:

      Anonymous@7:57 happy to hear your 4 pension plans are working for YOU. However, lets not forget Mr Saunders was talking about the MAJORITY it does not work for; so let’s not make this as the song goes, ‘all about you.’

      Mr Saunders does however need to press for complete overhaul of the financial service products available in Cayman. Consumers have little choice and virtually no protection. ( I know he have advocated for re mortgage protection and education).

      Mr Saunders when you get a chance, please light a fire under CIMA. They are an expensive waste of money. They can be doing so much more to bridge the disconnect between consumers and the financial service operators. But I guess there is no appeal in sitting down with banks locally when you can instead jaunt all over the world (in club class) to discuss legislation to comply with standards that keep changing every week!

      Thus, Mr Saunders I beg you to keep going!

      30
      3
    • john says:

      In the UK one can have an SSAS, in the USA a self directed IRA.
      Basically the money goes into a pension account that you can’t touch till you’re 65. But you choose how to invest it.

      • Anonymous says:

        Amen to that.. Also. US IRA can be broken like in Canada for a 10 percent excise tax. Allows access to capital for people in situations like this and for business opportunities. The 10 percent can be used for NAU

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.