PSRU Presents Final MFR Report to the National Investment Board, NIB

Receiving the report, the Executive Director of NIB, Dr. Hinga Sandy, commended the PSRU team for their dedication and professionalism throughout the review exercise as the process involves lots of work including desk reviews, interview and other rigorous exercises that culminated in such an excellent report. The MFR report, the Executive Director noted will play a critical role during the transition process.
Dr. Sandy expressed his willingness to set up a Change Management Team that will implement the recommendations in the report, particularly the setting up of the new organizational structure.

The Executive Director pointed out that it is in the best interest of government for institutions to be reviewed as it will not only streamline the wage bill but also ensure that institutions function effectively and efficiently.

In a power point presentation, the Director of PSRU, Mr. Sulaiman Phoray-Musa stated that the MFR report was not done in isolation as other critical institutions like HRMO played significant role in ensuring its completion on time.

He spoke about the objectives, thematic areas, methodology and approaches used to conduct the study pointing out that the review covered the Mandates and Functions; Organisational Structure; Human Resource Management (staffing, training, rationalization.); Sectoral Coordination and Collaboration; Assets and Equipment Management; Communications and ICT and Supervisory framework of the Investment Board.

Among the key findings and recommendations according to the Director were; there are no clear distinction between the Board and the Secretariat of the National Investment Board, which may expose the President, as Chair of the Board, to potential litigation despite constitutional immunity and the review recommends for a reassessment of the NIB Act, emphasizing a clear separation between the Board and the Secretariat.

The review also highlighted that the name National Investment Board could undermine its authority and influence and also noted the lack of a regulatory instruments to guide the implementation of the Act. The review strongly recommends for the change of name from National Investment Board to National Investment Authority and that the legislative review should be accompanied by the development of regulations to strengthen the Agency’s enforcement mechanisms. Additionally, the review recommend for the immediate creation of a policy that provides guidance, consistency, accountability, efficiency, and clarity regarding the operations of the NIB.

The review also noted that the current Board structure is seen as overly political and may hinder investor confidence, as the government’s role should focus on creating an enabling environment for investment and trade and the review recommends for a significant reduction in political influence on the Board.