Gen Tumukunde’s Critique of NSSF Meets Pushback from Savers Amid Record Returns and Oversight Tensions

Gender, Labour and Social Development Minister Lt Gen Henry Tumukunde has publicly expressed dissatisfaction with the National Social Security Fund’s (NSSF) performance and orientation, even as the Fund delivered a historic 22.53% interest rate for the 2025/26 financial year—its highest ever—crediting Shs5.44 trillion to members. At the 14th Annual Members’ Meeting in Kampala on 24 September 2026, Tumukunde challenged NSSF leadership to move beyond acting as a mere “custodian of savings” and become a catalyst for Uganda’s economic transformation. He questioned whether the Fund’s Shs32.8 trillion in assets under management is sufficiently driving growth, pressed for greater competence and competition on the board (including “horizontal exits” for underperformers), tighter action against non-compliant employers, and expanded coverage. He also highlighted divided oversight with the Finance Ministry, stating he cannot pass a budget only for spending to proceed without his consent, insisting on protecting workers’ interests.

Savers, however, have largely celebrated the record return—far above the prior 13.5% and the long-standing 15% peak from 2017/18—and pushed back against what many view as unfair targeting. The payout, supported by an 85% jump in total income to Shs6.51 trillion, strong equity and fixed-income performance, and improved operational efficiency (cost-to-income near 7.8%), delivered real returns well above inflation (around 3.7%). Assets grew about 26% year-on-year. Members see this as validation of a strategy prioritising prudent, risk-adjusted investments that safeguard and compound workers’ money over decades, rather than chasing higher-risk deployments that could expose retirement savings. Public commentary and member reactions have castigated the minister’s stance as an attack on a well-performing institution, warning against unwise investment ideas that prioritise short-term economic signalling over long-term security.

NSSF’s trajectory reflects steady maturation: consistent growth in contributions, membership expansion (including voluntary and informal-sector efforts), benefit payouts, and a focus on commercially viable, professionally appraised investments. Managing Director Patrick Ayota and the board have emphasised protecting member value while exploring strategic infrastructure opportunities, such as expressways, under prudent governance. This cautious approach has produced compounding returns that beat inflation targets and built one of East Africa’s largest pension pools. History—including past controversies over land and projects—underscores why risk aversion matters: workers’ money is not a discretionary development fund but deferred wages that must remain secure and liquid for benefits.

Tumukunde’s insistence on greater ministerial control over budgets and direction raises legitimate questions about accountability and alignment with national priorities. Yet fund members interpret the pressure—coupled with calls for the Fund to “adapt to my thinking”—as undue interference that risks politicising investment decisions. Delays or standoffs over budget approvals already risk disrupting operational timelines. With the Fund entering October, any prolonged friction three months into the new cycle could complicate planning, investment execution, and the next interest declaration process, ultimately affecting savers. Members argue this places managers in a difficult position: either toe a ministerial line that may favour more assertive (and potentially riskier) deployment of workers’ capital, or defend the professional, fiduciary model that delivered the record returns.

The core tension is structural and longstanding—oversight split between Gender/Labour (policy and workers’ interests) and Finance (investments and fiscal prudence). Both sides claim to protect contributors. NSSF’s success rests on insulating professional management from short-term political or developmental pressures that could erode trust or returns. Savers’ defence of the Fund signals strong member confidence in the current path: grow assets wisely, post competitive interest, expand coverage sustainably, and prioritise safety. While calls for broader economic impact and better governance are valid, substituting member-centric prudence with more aggressive directives risks the very performance that has made NSSF a rare public success story. Constructive dialogue that preserves independence while improving transparency and coverage would better serve Uganda’s workers than confrontation over control of their money.

The post Gen Tumukunde’s Critique of NSSF Meets Pushback from Savers Amid Record Returns and Oversight Tensions appeared first on Watchdog Uganda.