Rajen Narsinghen on the Basic Retirement Pension: "Moody’s and the IMF would have hit us hard without the reform"

Rajen Narsinghen defends a difficult but necessary choice regarding the Basic Retirement Pension amidst public opposition to the pension reform. As a guest on the show "Au cœur de l’info" on June 23, 2025, the Junior Minister stated that without the reform, Mauritius would have faced severe sanctions from international agencies. He acknowledged a lack of prior consultation but promised forthcoming adjustments.

Narsinghen was diplomatic yet pragmatic in his analysis. While he admitted that the Basic Retirement Pension (BRP) reform was poorly received by the public, he insisted that international institutions would have heavily penalized Mauritius without it.

"We did not succumb to the dictates of Moody’s or the International Monetary Fund (IMF), but there are realities to consider," he remarked during the show. He emphasized that failing to implement the reform would have led to an economic downgrade and serious repercussions for the country. "If we hadn’t pursued this reform, we would have been hit hard by Moody’s and the IMF," he added.

Recognizing public discontent, he took responsibility for the lack of prior consultations: "I admit my mistake: we should have engaged with the unions and civil society. However, the government has taken note of the criticisms from both internal and external sources. This is why two committees were established to find solutions."

"Corrective measures will be announced," he indicated, stating that he requested representatives from unions and civil society to present their ideas directly in these committees. Narsinghen emphasized the importance of hearing all voices "before the final report is submitted this Friday."

Regarding the 2025-26 Budget itself, the Junior Minister described it as progressive, "but not enough," he believes. He criticized the previous MSM government’s management over the past decade as disastrous: "The extent of the damage is catastrophic. Those who contest the state of the economy document are, in my opinion, acting in bad faith."

He added: "If an employee has another job before turning 60 and is already earning an income, they cannot benefit from the BRP simultaneously." Commenting on the citizen march organized for Saturday, he praised it as a peaceful and well-organized gathering.

However, he criticized the presence of former ministers and current opposition members: "They spoiled the march. They seem to forget the Rs 150 billion hole they left behind. Despite this, the MSM dares to show up and protest. They have no self-respect."

Bruneau Laurette, from the "Pa tous nou pansion" platform, also spoke out during the show, expressing his strong disagreement with the lack of dialogue surrounding this reform. "The BRP is an acquired right. Citizens are not begging for handouts. We need to put productivity back at the heart of the debate," he asserted.

He noted that there had been pressures to cancel the protest, but the organizers stood firm. He also remarked that the presence of former MSM ministers at the march was poorly received: "We could not tolerate their presence at the protest. To me, they have no self-respect. What is happening with the BRP is largely their fault. Their presence somewhat spoiled the union march; we refused to let these former ministers join us because they are equally responsible for this chaotic situation."

Radhakrishna Sadien, president of the State and Other Employees Federation (SEF) and a figure in the union platform, was also a guest on the program. He expressed his support for introducing a law on the "Right to Recall," which would allow voters to revoke an elected official mid-term if they fail to fulfill their commitments.

"Elected officials would then be obliged to meet their duties and remain attentive to the citizens’ grievances. Otherwise, the people would have the right to dismiss them," he asserted passionately. He took the discussion further by criticizing potential abuses in the current parliamentary system, where some elected officials might receive disproportionate benefits relative to their service duration: "An elected official who has served only a few months over two terms is entitled to a lifetime pension. I believe it should be revoked if they have not fulfilled their duties. This is where the 'Right to Recall' should come into play."