Halt SATURNIA meeting, Minister urged

Wed, 12 Jul 2017 13:02:47 +0000

By BENNIE MUNDANDO

THE Minister of Finance must halt the Saturnia Regina Pension Fund Annual General Meeting (AGM) slated for this Friday to replace the current board of trustees until the ministerial audit is completed, former BP employees which are on Saturnia pension scheme have demanded.

In a statement yesterday, the former employees contended that that there was no way an audit in glaring misapplication of funds could be taken while the architect of such mischief were out of office since the AGM would usher in a new board, insisting that the current crop should be subjected to auditors and provide answers to any disparities that would arise from the records.

They charged that the current board of trustees must remain in office until they clear the air on a number of issues by providing answers why among other things, K37, 000 was paid for actuarial evaluation on behalf of Puma when the rules of the trust stipulated that each sponsoring employer needed to meet such fees. The aggrieved former employees also want a detailed explanation why Puma energy engaged Benefits Consulting Services Limited to represent the company in the court case of Expendito Chipalo and 235 other Vs. BP and to state whether the company did not contravene the Pension and Insurance Authority (PIA) Act by testifying against fund managers and producing irregular and incorrect records.

Further, they want the audit to establish whether Benefits Consulting Services Limited did not contravene the PIA Act acting as actuaries in advising Puma energy to report an amount of K1, 629 million with respect to retrenchment pension Act as an estimate of their liability when the matter was still in court. “The minister should immediately stop the holding of the Saturnia Regna Pension Fund AGM proposed for this Friday July 14, 2017 whose main purpose is to replace the current board of trustees. It I just logical that the current board of trustees remain in place until the ministerial audit is completed. The current board of trustees may be found to have been negligent and must therefore be in office on order for them to answer to queries. “Additionally, the current board of trustees have raised issues for which they must be available for interrogation by the auditors and should therefore remain in office until the completion of the audit. For example, the trustees must explain why huge deposits without the board’s approval had been transferred to a bank where one of the trustees is an employee,” the statement reads in part.