The cabinet's decision regarding the Samoa National Provident Fund (SNPF) should have been made earlier. The return of the Ministry of Finance chief executive officer as the chair of the board and the Attorney General as legal adviser was much needed.

And, the removal of Papalii Panoa Moala as the board chair should have been done earlier. His interference with SNPF operations and micromanagement had created an environment unsuitable for a healthy workplace. Hopefully, this decision will bring changes and confidence to the SNPF employees. He remains on the board, and his expertise as a former CEO may come in handy during board meetings. There were times when Papalii’s actions were questionable, and at times it seemed he felt he was not accountable to anyone.

The questionable decisions include the fiasco at the Sheraton Mulifanua Beach Resort, where shares were stripped from the second-largest shareholder, and before that, their representative was kicked out of a meeting for asking questions. There have been questionable large loans to organisations, a proposed compulsory health insurance scheme without a referendum, alleged abuse of staff causing some to leave, changes in lending policies, a quarter million tala consultation, creation of five new posts that are going to cost $500,000 annually, and then there were blatant purchases of new mobile phones and Ipads.

As the SNPF board chairman, Papalii’s focus should have been on overseeing the board's strategic direction and ensuring its effectiveness, rather than interfering with day-to-day management operations. He should have acted as a bridge between the board and management, guiding the CEO and alerting the board to potential issues.

He should have held management accountable for results without directly micromanaging specific matters. The former chairman should have guided the CEO on matters of board concern and warned the CEO if potential issues were likely to arise, and not acted as the CEO. His excessive involvement in day-to-day operations, bypassing management to speak directly with staff, or seeking to influence senior executives undermined the effectiveness of the board and hindered management. He should have known about his clearly defined roles and responsibilities, which could have prevented conflicts and ensured effective collaboration.  

SNPF is the backbone of this country. People have always turned to the superannuation body for financial assistance, and it provides support to many when they retire. It is also a source of investments where the returns go back to members as dividends. The money that the SNPF holds belongs to the people of this country. The SNPF is also a local lender to the government. That is why prudent management and direction from the board are important. This was lacking under Papalii’s leadership as the chairman.

Last year, staff raised concerns about the alleged interference in their work by the former chairman. This resulted in his suspension and a warning from the prime minister that the toxic work environment created by such behaviour had to stop. Papalii was also accused of making decisions without consultation with management and other board members. It was believed that many of these decisions contravened established policies meant to guide the Fund's operations, leading to confusion and uncertainty among staff.

Such institutions have guidelines and policies for a reason, and that is for accountability and transparency, which the former chairman was not showing. Another accusation revolved around a significant loan application exceeding $10 million from a specific church, purportedly put forth through Papali'i. The chairman failed to disclose his conflict of interest in processing the application, despite his ties to the church in question. It would be interesting to see if the church can pay the loan back and the repayments are on time. To this, Papalii had responded that the church has security. Having security is not enough grounds to give a large loan.

The cabinet recently stopped a $12 million loan to the Gambling Control Authority from the SNPF. They asked GCA to provide an analysis of its ability to make repayments. This should have been done for all large loans given by the SNPF. Hopefully it was, and not just directions from the top to give the loans.

It was also unbelievable that the chairman believed that he did not need to explain himself to the people of this country. The people have the right to know how and where their money is being used. The people of this country deserve accountable and transparent people on boards. People who will work according to the guidelines and not run it like a family-owned business.

Have a blessed weekend.