Reconsider Superannuation Act

I AM a current contributing member to Nasfund and I’m eligible for housing advance under its current scheme.
However, my dream of building a home for my family under this scheme on my customary land cannot be realised because I do not currently reside there.
The Superannuation Act imposes the condition that Housing Advance ‘is to be used for the purchase or construction of the principal place of residence for the member’, and has no provisions to build or construct in the member’s place of origin, if he resides out of province/village.
This has really disadvantaged a lot of us, and is making it difficult for us to benefit from this scheme.
Majority of the contributors are currently working and living out of their provinces/villages – this automatically disqualifies us from applying for the housing advance scheme. Nasfund management should reconsider:
Firstly, the requirement for ‘principal place of residence’ is unfavourable, in the sense that;
l my current ‘principal place of residence’ is the rental accommodation that I live in; and,
l obviously I don’t have the land title to it, and I cannot build here. That is only temporary.
Secondly, most ordinary working class people cannot afford to purchase land in urban areas with proper land titles – prices are sky high. Unrealistic requirement.
The majority of us are not going to reside in urban areas when we resign, we are going back to our home provinces/villages, and we need a proper place of residence where we can settle down.
So please make a change to the Superannuation Act, and accommodate contributors building houses on their customary land while working, whether they currently reside there or not – because eventually they will do, and it will be their permanent place of residence.

Nasfund Contributor, Lae