— Ram questions administration, actuarial warnings and $10B allocation
(Kaieteur News) – The National Insurance Scheme (NIS) may have recorded a positive cash flow during the first half of 2026, but questions about its long-term sustainability, administration and treatment of contributors remain unresolved, according to Chartered Accountant Christopher Ram.
Ram, in his latest column, “2026 Mid-Year Report: Beyond the NIS Numbers,” noted that NIS collected approximately $24.5 billion during the first six months of the year while spending $21.9 billion.
But while the figures show a positive cash flow, Ram argues that they tell little about the financial health of a social-insurance scheme whose obligations stretch decades into the future.
His concerns come against the backdrop of remarks by Finance Minister and Minister responsible for NIS, Dr. Ashni Singh, at the Scheme’s 57th anniversary observance, where he said contributors must not be “pushed around” and argued that NIS should ultimately be judged by whether people receive the benefits to which they are entitled.
Singh also pointed to nearly 80,000 additional contributors since 2020 as evidence of progress.
Ram, however, said contributor growth must be viewed in context, particularly in an oil-driven economy where some workers are temporary or short-term employees who may leave Guyana before qualifying for or claiming benefits.
“Numbers without context can therefore materially overstate what the increase means,” he wrote.
Pensioners caught in the system
Two cases highlighted by Ram; those of 81-year-old Nathan Craig and Shariff Zainul — illustrate the difficulties faced by contributors who have spent years fighting for pensions they believe they are entitled to.
Craig, of 204 Cedar Street, McKenzie, Linden, worked for Kaieteur Company Limited and later Linden Mining Enterprise Limited from 1990 to 2003. During that period, he made more than the 750 contributions required to qualify for an old-age pension.
Nathan Craig, 81, still awaits his NIS pension.
NIS rejected his claim, prompting him to appeal on 29th September, 2010.
The matter remained before the NIS Appeal Tribunal for 13 years before it was finally heard on 28th October, 2023. The Tribunal ruled in Craig’s favour.
NIS wrote to Craig on 18th December, 2023, informing him that he had won the appeal. In the same letter, however, the Scheme said it was dissatisfied with the decision and would take the matter to the National Insurance Commissioner.
Ram said that since then, NIS has produced no decision cancelling the Tribunal’s ruling and has not paid Craig his pension.
According to Ram, the only reason given by NIS is that some of Craig’s contributions were paid after he turned 60.
Ram argues that the responsibility for making those payments rested with Craig’s employer and that the pensioner should not be made to bear the consequences.
Craig, now 81, remains unpaid and, according to Ram, is forced to take on small manual jobs despite his age.
Zainul’s case is similarly prolonged.
Zainul worked and paid NIS contributions from 1969 to 2001 and turned 60 on 16th October, 2011.
A bed-ridden Shariff Zainul.
Ram said NIS initially recorded that Zainul had 374 contributions, then 426 and later 453, without explaining the changes.
Instead of receiving a pension, Zainul was paid two one-off grants of $9,869 and $14,549.
At the centre of his case are 354 disputed contributions which, according to the evidence presented, were deducted from his wages by Toolsie Persaud Ltd. but were not remitted to NIS.
Zainul produced payslips, a letter from the company’s former Personnel Officer and sworn statements from two former co-workers whom NIS itself accepted had worked at the company.
NIS nevertheless rejected the evidence and relied on its own contribution records. Those records did not include 1994, despite NIS acknowledging that it had Zainul’s payslips for that year.
Justice Damone Younge subsequently found the records to be wrong or incomplete. She also described NIS contribution records as having become notorious for being unreliable and raised concerns about employers’ failure to remit contributions at the expense of workers.
She ordered NIS to pay Zainul’s pension from his 60th birthday.
NIS appealed, and on 26th January, 2024, the Full Court overturned that decision and sent the matter back for rehearing.
Fifteen years after reaching pension age, Zainul still has no pension and, according to Ram, is now bedridden.
Actuarial warnings ignored
Ram also questioned the Scheme’s response to repeated actuarial warnings.
He pointed to the Eighth Actuarial Review, conducted as at 31st December, 2011, which warned that NIS was approaching “crisis stage.”
By 2016, NIS had acknowledged that more than 70 recommendations had accumulated from actuarial and reform exercises, he said.
Ram argued that the accumulation of recommendations without corresponding implementation represents one of the Scheme’s central problems.
“Over the past two decades, the Scheme would be hard-pressed to identify even one significant actuarial recommendation implemented for each year that has passed,” he wrote.
He stressed that responsibility does not rest solely with Singh, but extends to successive Governments, Boards and NIS managements.
“The reviews were done and the warnings given. The failure was to act,” Ram stated.
CLICO exposure raises further questions
Ram also revisited NIS’s controversial exposure to CLICO.
He recalled that Singh, while serving as Finance Minister in 2009, told Parliament that NIS had approximately $5.6 billion invested in CLICO — about 20% of the Scheme’s assets.
That exposure was subsequently addressed through a government debenture arrangement under the then APNU+AFC administration.
Ram said the episode should have strengthened calls for improved investment governance, risk management and institutional reform at NIS.
He also criticised the Scheme’s infrastructure and record-keeping systems, arguing that an institution established in 1969 has not modernised sufficiently to meet the demands of a rapidly changing economy.
He cited NIS’s own acknowledgement in 2016 that employees were working in “less than acceptable conditions,” while the Scheme was pursuing electronic contribution schedules, online contribution checking and efforts to clean its contribution records.
“Defective contribution records are not merely untidy files; they can determine whether a person receives a pension,” Ram wrote.
Minimum pension gap questioned
Ram also questioned the relationship between the NIS minimum pension and the public service minimum wage.
He noted that NIS states that the old-age pension must not be less than 50% of the existing public service minimum wage.
According to figures cited by Ram, the published minimum NIS pension is $43,075, while the current public service minimum wage is $102,346. Half of the latter is $51,173.
On that basis, Ram calculated a monthly difference of $8,098 for each pensioner receiving the minimum pension.
He said the latest published Annual Report does not indicate how many pensioners receive the minimum, making it impossible to determine the overall financial impact.
Questions over $10B NIS injection
Ram also raised questions about the Government’s previously announced $10 billion allocation for one-off grants to contributors who fell short of the 750 contributions required for a pension.
He noted that Singh, in the 2025 Budget, said Government would be “injecting $10 billion into the scheme” to finance full-and-final grants, subject to claimants relinquishing their legal rights.
Ram said NIS subsequently indicated that it received reimbursements for grants actually paid and that total payments under the programme fell well short of $10 billion.
Yet, he pointed out, the 2026 Estimates showed virtually the entire $10 billion provision as revised expenditure for 2025.
Ram is therefore calling for an accounting of the funds.
“How much was actually paid in grants, how much was reimbursed to NIS, how much is owed to minimum pensioners under the 50% rule and, if virtually the whole $10 billion was recorded as spent, where did the balance go?” he asked.
NIS reports years behind
Ram further criticised the absence of recent annual reports from the NIS website.
He noted that the latest annual report currently published is for 2023, with no 2024 or 2025 reports listed.
“For an institution whose solvency depends on contributions, investments, demographics and future benefit obligations, reporting years behind is unacceptable,” he wrote.
Ram argued that public accountability should also include reliable contribution records, functioning statutory offices and transparent reconciliation of the $10 billion allocation.
He said Guyana’s transformation through the oil economy makes reform of NIS even more urgent.
A modernised Scheme, he suggested, should consider issues such as gender-neutral parental benefits, unemployment protection and medical support for elderly pensioners.
Ram concluded that the warnings have repeatedly been made by actuaries, former NIS officials and others, but sustained action has been lacking.
“The voices have therefore not been absent. Nor have the diagnoses. What has been missing is sustained action,” he wrote.
He described that as “the true tragedy of the NIS.”
Source: Kaieteur News
