National Pension Fund is actually counterproductive
Till now, my view was that the NPRF was a smoke and mirrors jobbie. Investing in assets whilst still having a National Debt - balance sheet bloating doing nothing really for bad or for worse.
Now I think it is actually psychologicaly counterproductive. We are already hearing demands from Labour and the IMO and others to spend the fund on more worthy immediate projects than future pensions and indeed these projects are more worthy.
If there was no such fund and instead we simply reduced our debt, there wouldn't be such an obvious target for greedy eyes. So, far from finishing up as a fund for pensions, it will become an ever increasing temptation to be put to more immediate and arguably more deserving use. This temptation would be very much less if we simply reduced the National Debt.
And another thing, what's all this about future Finance Ministers can't touch it. Is Ho Chi Quinn just bluffing - simple legislative change seems to be all that is needed. If they really wanted to make this Fund secure they should have had a Constitutional Amendment which says it can't be touched until 2030 and furthermore that, unlike other Amendments, it itself could not be overturned even by Referendum.:rolleyes