Please describe your concerns with this comment. If you simply wish to respond to the comment please use the Comment Box on the story itself:
Noel The figures are what they are, and yes, there has clearly been some public suppression (or let's say "playing down") of the true liabilities figure, which is what I was so committed to expose them for what they are. The breakdown of the investments was published in either the latest actuarial valuation or the States audited accounts (sorry I am away from my information on this). However, they are not invested quite as conservatively as one might expect a pension scheme to normally be, seemingly because of a wish to take extra investment risks in order to chase higher returns to recoup losses made around in around 2010. There is no exposure to "local projects". The trustees of the scheme are responsible for the investment strategy, and they take advice from the actuaries and from other investment advisors. Whether or not they listen to that advice, who knows. Realistically the members are not going to get any say in how it is managed. The trustees' obligation in carrying out their role is to act in the best interests of the beneficiaries at all times.