If Jamaican voters were not so foolishly diehard in favour of one or the other of the political parties, our governments would not have been so blasé about collecting the near $2 billion stolen from National Housing Trust (NHT) contributors by employers.

Any self-respecting Government would have been ashamed to learn from Wednesday’s edition of the Business Observer that over the last 20 years employers have deducted $1.69 billion — increased to $1.95 billion when interest is added — but have not paid it over to the trust.

But we know that Jamaican governments have been notoriously lazy when it comes to collecting revenue at all levels of the system. That is why the country has not moved from the usurious and inefficient Pay As You Earn (PAYE) scheme to a more progressive tax apparatus.

Moreover, since 2013, the ruling administrations have joined those recalcitrant employers in raiding the coffers of the NHT by syphoning off $11 billion a year, even if they can show justification for it.

What the Government should be most concerned about in the Business Observer exposé is the fact that when the NHT deductions are not paid over by employers, it potentially denies their staff the benefit of a mortgage from the trust or the annual contributions refunds.

There is apparently little or no evidence that the Government is putting any muscle behind the NHT in its collection efforts, which the trust says include education and awareness programmes; moral suasion; issuance of payment reminders; arrears statements; proposed payment agreements; demand letters; and, when all else fails, litigation.

Despite freely feeding from the NHT trough and allowing employers to get away with murder, governments have been very niggardly about putting back the people’s funds into their hands, besides the occasional vote-catching gimmicks.

We have, in the past, argued, and we reiterate now, that if the NHT can survive the Government’s forays into its funds — without depriving contributors of housing opportunities, as it claims — more can be done with some of those resources to cushion the hardships they face.

Why is it not possible to help to increase their disposable income by making faster refunds of contributions? The current practice is that refunds are made from the eighth year of contribution. How damaging could it be for the NHT to begin refunds from say the fourth or fifth year of contribution?

This would certainly fast-forward the refund of billions of dollars to contributors on whose behalf this money is being held by the trust and thereby stimulate the economy.

Alternatively, why not allow contributors who have years of refund not yet due for collection to use the present value of this sum as security or repayment for a loan from a lending institution.

No doubt, lending institutions would find this source of security to be very attractive and it would not affect the NHT financially if the loan is repaid at the time when the refund is normally due.

There is also Senator Damion Crawford’s 2020 suggestion, with which we agreed, that the NHT should consider establishing a rent-to-own system that would make home ownership easier for young people by making houses available to them at a monthly rate that would include the rental cost and a savings component.

Where are our creative minds?