Dear Editor,
The case of Ismay Lake, as reported in the Stabroek News of August 08, 2019, goes against everything that social security is intended to represent.
Where was the empathy, humaneness and reasonableness of the NIS in the determination of this claim for survivor’s pension?
Ismay Lake is from the Amerindian Village of Wakapoa, Lower Pomeroon and because of financial difficulties was forced to leave school in Standard 2.
Wasn’t it therefore, putting the test too high to expect a person of Ismay Lake’s educational background to study literature about the NIS’ survivor’s pension? Ismay Lake cannot read technical documents and must be excused for failing to appreciate the language in which the National Insurance Regulations are couched.
Prior to applying for survivor’s pension from the NIS, Ismay Lake was in receipt of social assistance – ‘poor relief’ – from the Ministry of Social Protection, which she enjoyed for approximately three years. It was while being interviewed for continued ‘poor relief’ that it was discerned that she was entitled to survivor’s pension from the NIS. Her ‘poor relief’ was stopped and she was advised to claim survivor’s pension from the NIS, which she did in November 2016.
Having regard to all the circumstances, including Ismay Lake’s level of education, lack of experience and knowledge of NI regulations, it is only logical to conclude that she did not know of her right to benefit and was unable to provoke an earlier enquiry.
And in all of this, where is the concept of social security, which seems to have been lost on all the actors in this case including the GM and the Appeals Tribunal, whose decision says volumes of its competence or lack thereof. It was never the intent of the NIS that poor persons approach the courts for social justice. However, the statutory bodies established to hear complaints from aggrieved claimants seem not to be working.
Ms Lake has complained of feeling demeaned and insulted after being accused of seeking the sympathy of the National Insurance Board for whatever reason there may have been.
I have copied in its entirety, the offending paragraph the NIS and the NIB used to demean and insult Ismay Lake: “The operations of the NIS and the NIB are governed by statute and they cannot act in breach of the legislation and or create bad precedents for persons who claim ignorance of the law or ask the Board to sympathize with them.”
All Ms Lake requested of the NIS was the prompt and proper determination of her claim in accordance with the law.
The million dollar question that must now be asked of the NIS and NIB, is if they only act in conformity with the law, why demand and not encourage new pensioners to have their pensions paid into financial institutions? Because, where these demands are not met, the claims are not accepted.
This imposition is in breach of Regulation 10 (1) of the NI & SS (Claims and Payments) Regulations which states, “Subject to these Regulations, pensions shall be paid monthly…at such Post Office or office of the Board as the GM, after enquiry of the pensioner, may from time to time determine.”
This regressive policy is unlawful, being in clear breach of the just cited Regulation. It seeks to deny the pensioner the right to choose and a peaceful enjoyment of property, an enshrined right that cannot be disrupted by a whimsical and capricious decision.
Changes have to be carefully and legally crafted, not only to safeguard the concept of social security but to avoid unlawful authoritarian abuses. If one does not understand and appreciate the concept of social security then everything, as is now being done in the name of social security, will be abhorrent to its spirit.
Because of issues like these, trust in the NIS is in short supply or non-existent.
Yours faithfully,
(Name and address supplied)
