Jagdeo’s benefits are mother of immoralities – says anti corruption advocate
…but Rohee defends Jagdeo’s pension benefits
General Secretary for the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) has come out in defence of the exorbitant benefits which former
General Secretary of the PPP Clement Rohee
President Bharrat Jagdeo is benefiting from under the Former Presidents (Benefits and Facilities) Act which Jagdeo made law in 2009.
Under this controversial law which was vehemently opposed at the time, it costs taxpayers an average of $3M each month to support Jagdeo.
His security, electricity and transportation alone, average $1.7M each month. Then there is his $1.2M pension each month.
Using the monthly average of $1.2M for his security, transportation, electricity and pension, it means that Jagdeo to date, since leaving office would have cost taxpayers in excess of $83M.
Rohee in defence of the benefits that Jagdeo is accruing said that “aren’t all of those things within what the Parliament provide him with, so what is the problem?”
He said that there “will always be objections and there will continue to be objections, like we are seeing everyday in the headlines of the Kaieteur News.”
The PPP General Secretary continued, “Kaieteur News is never giving up on Jagdeo, all that I am saying is that whatever spending was done it was not illegal it was authorized by the Parliament, you are free like the Kaieteur News is free and every citizen of Guyana is free to express a view on this money.”
Rohee said that one has to be certain and take clearly into account that “the money was not illegitimately spent, not illegally spent and not spent outside of what was provided by the Parliament.”
It was Alliance for Change (AFC) Leader Khemraj Ramjattan, who back in 2009 computed that the Former President’s pension package would amount to just over $3M monthly. This was vehemently denied by the administration at the time.
Carl Greenidge, of A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), had attempted to cap the benefits, under the controversial piece of legislation by bringing amendments to the National Assembly. This was approved by the opposition using its majority but President Donald Ramotar, has never assented to it.
Addressing the cap that the opposition approved for the President’s benefits, Rohee said that “any cap that is coming from the opposition I would bag it.”
Rohee said that he does not agree with the combined opposition’s position that the money Jagdeo is receiving is exorbitant.
“I disagree with anything the opposition says in respect of Jagdeo, I disagree because I believe that they are being personally vindictive towards the ex- President; that’s my position as the General Secretary of the PPP,” said Rohee.
The PPP, according to Rohee, supported the Bill in the Parliament with respect to the benefits of the President’s Bill.
“We consciously did that in the Parliament, every single MP supported that, including Mr. Nagamootoo who at the time was sitting on the government benches, so if we did that at that time, that is a manifestation of where the PPP stood clear and simply.”
Former President
Bharrat Jagdeo
Asked whether that position conflicts with that of founder of the PPP Dr. Cheddi Jagan, Rohee said, “I would leave that for the so called political pundits to speculate on, that I’m not getting into.”
Rohee was then asked that in a democratic society the government and the opposition are the people who would generally engage in discussions, bargain and work together or negotiate, but from his position the opposition is inconsequential.
Rohee said that “as far as I am personally concerned, the opposition doesn’t want anything to do with me, so why should I have anything to do with them.”
He said, however, from the position of General Secretary when it comes to the interest of the party “that’s a different question because the party’s position rest with the central committee, the congress rests with the executive committee which are collective bodies where all the leaders sit.
“When they make a decision with which I am a part of, well then those decisions would be faithfully followed and implemented.”
And an anti corruption advocate is contending that even though the benefits might be legal it is the “height of immorality; it’s the mother of all moralities.”
His comments came against the backdrop of Guyana’s economic standing where wealth is highly skewed with the few rich and the many poor. He said the perpetuation of the former Presidents benefits “lacks serious consideration for the poor, for the disadvantaged, the unemployed youths.
“Look how many people are living in Guyana with minimum wage; so many people are unemployed, in abject poverty.”
“This thing is a national disgrace, it’s a national embarrassment, it lacks morality, integrity, fair play, justice and equality,” said the advocate.