The claim by the Samoa National Provident Fund that the majority of Samoans have agreed to the compulsory Medi-Insure scheme sounds gibberish. It is nothing but hogwash.

These claims seem to be made from the three consultations, two in Upolu and one in Savaii where less than 100 people took part and most seats were occupied by SNPF staff. The claim does not rightfully portray what the members want. The fact is that the consultations were a question-and-answer process about what Medi-Insure was and how it would be implemented.

There was no referendum taken either at the consultations or even through the SNPF app which most members have. How is it then, that the SNPF can claim that the majority want the scheme and it should be made compulsory? A paper on the Medi-Insure scheme has been put forward for the cabinet to discuss and approve so SNPF can move forward with implementing it.

It is not right that the cabinet approves the deduction of $300 from the 34,000 members' contributions without people agreeing. The government is there to protect the people’s interests and not abuse them. Years of neglect of the health system do not justify taking money from the people to improve it or to fuel an ambitious scheme that had already been rejected.

It needs to be put to the people and only implemented when the majority agree for it to move forward. Yes, it could improve access to health for all SNPF contributors and their dependents but the money belongs to people. You cannot dip into someone else’s pocket without their permission and use their wealth.

The SNPF will take $300 each from the contributors who have enough funds in their accounts making a total estimated contribution of $8 million. The government and the Accident Compensation Scheme are expected to provide $20 million. The start-up for Medi-Insure would be $28 million. It would be even more if dependents were covered. This is the other issue. The ACC under its governing legislation cannot give the money for the scheme. Do not forget that one per cent of your every pay goes to funding the ACC.

There are two cash cows, the SNPF and ACC and according to the proposal they are ready for milking. The $12 million government contribution is also public funds. The SNPF board also argues that once implemented, the scheme will start making profits just as an insurance scheme does. What happens to this profit, is it paid back as a dividend or stays with the body that will be set up to implement the scheme?

Over the years, the SNPF has shifted its focus from its primary role as the retirement fund to becoming a bank-like financial institution giving out loans and now in another move, it is becoming an insurance company where the premium will be compulsory whether the contributor wants to subscribe or not.

There is also concern that those who are not contributors will continue to pay full prices for healthcare. Doesn’t this sound like marginalising people who are not contributors or cannot afford the scheme? Healthcare should be provided equally to all people of this country irrelative of their ability to be able to afford it, at least locally.

The cabinet has to consider the fact that people have not really been consulted or their say taken on board. The SNPF does not speak for the people on such matters, people should have a say in how they wish their money to be spent.  The only way to do this is through a referendum.

The healthcare scheme’s motives are not bad. It aims to make healthcare affordable to almost everyone. Get a referendum done to find out how many contributors want to be part of this. That would be the right thing to do. Forcing people to be part of Medi-Insure without consent is undemocratic and almost dictatorial.