What manner of man is this, or what manner of creature is it?

Shame on you Jagdeo!

Can someone tell me how the PNC voted to let this legislation (President's Pension) pass in the NA?

Bharrat Jagdeo is a shameless bugger. A national parasite. An unconscionable public figure.

Why the hell doesn't he look for real work with all his gifted doctorates?

The sponger hasn't reached the real retirement age.

The political opposition ought to make Jagdeo's largesse a hot-button issue, educating the average voter on another aspect of PPP corruption and contempt for the working poor.

Don, that Act was passed before Jagdeo demitted OP, when the PPP had a majority in the National Assembly.

The PNC plus the AFC could not vote down the bill.

I know that the PPP had a majority and that the PNC and AFC could not vote it down. That does not mean that the PNC and AFC voted against the Bill. Again, how did these parties vote? I do not have a copy of Hansard.

The PNC plus the AFC could not vote down the bill.I know that the PPP had a majority and that the PNC and AFC could not vote it down. That does not mean that the PNC and AFC voted against the Bill. Again, how did these parties vote? I do not have a copy of Hansard.

This has to be brought back and put out there for the people to see and be reminded every time they need some bread for their families but they only got a small piece leff back, not enough for bread.

My angst, is y did Nagamootoo, Ram Karran and Ramsammy voted yes for the bill. These characters always boasting how much they care for the impoverished.

And y did the Jagans saddled the Guyanese ppl with such a parasite. Surely, they could have endorsed more rational men.

House passes bill to repeal former Guyana Presidents’ benefits

By Kwesi Isles Jan 25, 2013 -
Courtesy Demerara Waves -
The Guyana National Assembly Friday night passed an opposition bill aimed at repealing the Former Presidents Benefits and Other Facilities Act of 2009 without the support of the government.

The Former Presidents Benefits and Other Facilities Bill of 2012 was piloted by APNU MP Carl Greenidge and also proposed caps on the benefits set out under the Act. The opposition has contended that the former president’s pension, which is seven-eighths that of the sitting president and pegged at GUY$1.2M a month, is sufficient for a former president to live with the dignity commensurate with the office.

However, President Donald Ramotar is unlikely to assent to the bill having said that he would not approve of any bill which does not contain government input.

Greenidge in opening debate on the bill said the original was badly drafted and was “exceptionally generous.” His bill, he added, would remedy the deficiencies inherent in the 2009 Act.

Among the provisions of the new bill is a GUY$5,000 per month cap for water, electricity and telephone services at the former president’s residence in Guyana; no more than three household staff, a similar amount of clerical staff; full time security personal from the Presidential Guard Service with no more than two security personnel; and provision of no more than two vehicles owned and maintained by the State.

Additionally, the former president would be entitled to an annual vacation allowance equivalent to the cost of two first class return airfares .

Another clause stated that the individual would be entitled to free medical attention or reimbursement of medical expenses incurred for him/ her or his/her spouse or entitled child if the treatment are sought outside Guyana only if unavailable locally.

Controversially, the bill limits the benefit to the “natural children” of the former president and spouse and they must be below the age of 18 and the financial outlay would be no more than GUY$200,000 annually.

The new bill would also remove the tax exemptions for the former president which, under the 2009 Act, are identical to that enjoyed by a serving president. It also states that a former president would cease to be entitled to the benefits if the individual engages in “business, trade or paid employment” or is convicted.

Attorney General Anil Nandlall contended that the bill was unconstitutional because it was seeking to deprive former presidents of property that they would have earned in contravention of the constitution but AFC’s Khemraj Ramjattan rejoined by pointing out that the constitution only provided for a pension and gratuity for former presidents and not “benefits and other facilities.”

According to him, the 2009 Act was wrong in the first place.

Siggy, in 2009, Nagamootoo was a PPP parliamentarian and voted as per party discipline.

However, I understand that when the PPP caucus had discussed the bill internally at F-House, Nagamootoo voiced objections, to chagrin of powerful soup drinkers.

In 2009 Ramkarran was Speaker in the Assembly.

Bharrat jagdeo is not doing anything Ramjattan or Nigel Hughes wouldnt do.

Mark my words on this, save it and frame this here what I am telling you now.

Siggy, you the wrong end of the stick. 

The opposition then objected to the bill but the PPP had majority.

- Stabroek News - http://www.stabroeknews.com -

Presidents benefits bill passes deeply divided Parliament

Posted By Andre Haynes On May 1, 2009 @ 5:16 am In Archives | 69 Comments

-opposition calls for caps ignored

The government last evening used its parliamentary majority to pass a bill to legislate benefits for former presidents, despite opposition concern over its scope.

Ashni Singh

The Former Presidents (Benefits and Other Facilities) Bill 2009 had a thorny passage through the house, where both the PNCR-1G and the AFC insisted that there be caps put on the entitlements that would be available through the legislation. On a call for a division before the final reading of the bill, it received 32 government votes in its favour and 25 opposition votes against. While the two opposition parties said they did not object to the principle behind the legislation, they withheld support for it in the absence of specific details about the benefits. GAP-ROAR was the sole opposition party to give support to the bill, although the party’s MP Everall Franklin did indicate some reservations and warned the government to be ready to defend it when labour leaders come seeking benefits for the working people.

Finance Minister Dr. Ashni Singh, who piloted the bill through its final stages, led the government benches on the bill, explaining that it is in keeping with the government’s commitment to openness and transparency and declared that all Guyanese committed to ensuring former presidents are “treated with appropriate respect” would support the bill. At the end of the debate, which saw several caustic exchanges that led Speaker Ralph Ramkarran to call for order, he said he was disappointed that it was as “rancorous” as it turned out to be.

Underscoring a point that would become the mantra for the government speakers, Singh emphasised that it was a “statute-based approach” to enshrine benefits and facilities that have thus far been provided for through custom and practice at the discretion of both the current and previous administrations. He noted that it was in vein that the Office of the Spouse of the President Bill was introduced (which was also passed at yesterday’s sitting, albeit with support of all the parties).

Winston Murray

Additionally, the government yesterday tabled the Leader of the Opposition (Benefits and Other Facilities) Bill 2009, seeking to put into law access to certain benefits and other facilities to be enjoyed by the office holder.

In the days leading up to the debate, the benefits proposed for former presidents had been the subject of a public relations war between the government and the main opposition. The PNCR-1G, in a full page ad in the national newspapers condemned the bill as an attempt by President Bharrat Jagdeo to secure “luxurious living at the expense of taxpayers” through legislation. However, the PPP/C administration launched a campaign to defend the legislation, while accusing the main opposition of double standards and duplicity.

Singh said that while the opposition sought to claim that the issue was about principle rather than any individual, the ads attacked the person of the President, whom they dubbed shameless and selfish.

PNCR-1G MP and shadow finance minister Winston Murray told the Assembly that the main opposition endorsed the principle that the bill sought to enshrine but wanted specifics and he called on the government to send it to a special select committee in order to secure consensus. “If you want a statute-based approach, you should specify the benefits,” he argued.

Murray said that the party believed a bill of such nature should be devoid of controversy, while noting the need for the highest offices in the land to be treated with great dignity. He added that while the party might disagree with the approach of the head of state, it has never questioned the deep commitment of any of the holders of the office to building the nation.

Indeed, he agreed that the previous approach had the disadvantage of exposing the former office holders to the direction of the administration and supported ensuring rights by statute, arguing that it was on the same basis that the party would support the Leader of the Opposition’s benefits bill. At the same time, Murray urged that the benefits and provisions offered under the bill be detailed with greater specificity, complaining that it lacked exact meaning in a number of instances. “We believe that these things should have a cap,” he said, mentioning that the working people are often told that they cannot have increases and have to settle for pittances. “Why must we ensure in law open-ended benefits?”

Among the benefits and facilities proposed by the bill is payment of utilities at the place of residence in Guyana; the services of personal and household staff, including an attendant and a gardener; services of clerical and technical staff, if requested; full-time personal security and services of the Presidential Guard Service at the place of residence; the provision of motor vehicles owned and maintained by the State; toll free road transportation in Guyana; an annual vacation allowance equivalent to the cost of two first class return airfares provided on the same basis as that granted to serving members of the judiciary; and a tax exemption status identical to that enjoyed by a serving President.

While Singh said the benefits outlined in the bill were based on what has been offered to former presidents and in some instances what has been requested, Murray expressed concern about the open-endedness inherent in the bill, pointing out that it did not give any specific numbers. In this regard, he objected to clause 3 of the bill, which states that the minister may make regulations for giving effect to its provisions. He questioned also whether similar amenities were indeed given to late former presidents Arthur Chung or Desmond Hoyte, citing the provisions for an unspecified number of vehicles and the services of the presidential guard. “We certainly didn’t give him anything like this,” he said, referring to Chung. “Maybe we were too mean… but that doesn’t mean we should go overboard now and try to give away the public purse.”

Murray also registered his concern about the proviso for tax exemptions on par with serving presidents, noting that they receive tax-free incomes.

Meanwhile, AFC MP Khemraj Ramjattan declared that with the bill the PPP/C was betraying the legacy of late former President Cheddi Jagan, saying the founders of the party had urged against extravagance. “It makes me feel the ‘PPP’ is now ‘Perks, Privilege and Power,’” he said, “I won’t tell you what the ‘C’ is for-corruption is all over the place.”

He also argued for the bill to include caps, questioning how it could be considered accountable and transparent when it leaves major discretion positive to former presidents and negative to tax payers.

According to him, the bill is scandalous to the extreme, coming as it does when the country is surrounded by financial crisis and all across the Caribbean, leaders are considering pay cuts. And our PPP stalwarts are gonna say yeah to this bill,” he said, although observing that none of the government’s chosen speakers on the bill were members of the governing party. Ramjattan also questioned the haste to pass the bill, noting that it was suspicious on the heels of an announcement by the president that he was uninterested in serving a third term contrary to speculation.

In giving his support to the bill, Franklin said he believed former presidents should be made as comfortable as possible so that they have no need to seek other employment and could remain assets to the governance of the country. He added that a monetary value cannot be put to the service of presidents and urged that the bill not be seen as being intended for any specific person but rather for looking after all former presidents. However, he also said that the government ought to consider provisions for removing benefits in instances where former presidents are criminally charged or impeached as well as a stipulation that residency be a requirement to access the benefits.

Labour Minister Manzoor Nadir, Foreign Affairs Minister Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, PPP/C MP Odinga Lumumba and PNCR MPs Aubrey Norton and Lance Carberry also spoke on the bill.

Meanwhile, the Leader of the Opposition (Benefits and Other Facilities) Bill 2009 provides by statute access to amenities and benefits by the holder of the office, having regard to the services and dignity attached to the office. According to the bill, the holder of the office shall be entitled at government expense to a rent-free furnished office accommodation; medical attention, including medical treatment or reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by him for himself and the dependent members of his family; full time security service at his official place of residence; the services of a secretary or an executive secretary, a chauffeur, a gardener and a domestic servant; and vacation allowance as is applicable to a minister.
Carberry, who conducted discussions for drafting of the legislation, pointed out that in stark contrast to the former presidents’ bill, it specifies the benefits that would be provided.

---

Article printed from Stabroek News: http://www.stabroeknews.com

URL to article: http://www.stabroeknews.com/20...-divided-parliament/

 

Click here to print.

Copyright © 2010 Stabroek News. All rights reserved.

PNCR-1G MP and shadow finance minister Winston Murray told the Assembly that the main opposition endorsed the principle that the bill sought to enshrine but wanted specifics and he called on the government to send it to a special select committee in order to secure consensus. “If you want a statute-based approach, you should specify the benefits,” he argued.

Murray said that the party believed a bill of such nature should be devoid of controversy, while noting the need for the highest offices in the land to be treated with great dignity. He added that while the party might disagree with the approach of the head of state, it has never questioned the deep commitment of any of the holders of the office to building the nation.

quoted from 2009 when the PPP had the majority

Emile_Mervin  •

Jagdeo’s pension package is an abuse of taxpayers’ money – GTUC

Former President of Guyana Bharrat Jagdeo

The Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC) says that it is troubled that while the law assures every citizen healthcare, there remains an absence of proper universal health in Guyana.

“The masses have to pray not to fall sick while government officials use our tax-dollars to access the best healthcare in developed countries…This disparity in access breaches the sense of nationhood/oneness the people have been assured of.”

GTUC notes too that the same can be said for the right to pension of government officials, one of whom is former President Bharrat Jagdeo, who continues to run-up exorbitant healthcare expenses, pension and post presidential benefits on the backs of the working poor.

“While the taxpayers pay millions for his electricity per month, they are being disconnected because they cannot afford to pay their $5,000…It is unconscionable and criminal that any person who is entrusted the privilege of the people to manage their affairs, to reward themselves with a Cadillac lifestyle in this donkey cart economy…It is an abuse of the taxpayer’s money and their trust.”

“The plantation economy and lifestyle the PPP seeks to impose on this society is a departure from the sovereignty of this nation…We must join with forces, internal and external, to ensure we live this nation’s ideals as outlined and protected in its laws.”

Since demitting office in December 2011, former President of Guyana, Bharrat Jagdeo, has received as pension totaling $37.2M up to the end of last month.

This is in addition to the recently disclosed figures upwards of $45M ($45,417,950) which the taxpayers have had to spend on his electricity bills, transportation and security between December 2011 and last February.

This financial package was cemented in law by Jagdeo himself, when in 2009, he as head of the then Cabinet, caused to be laid in the National Assembly, the Former Presidents (Benefits and Facilities) Bill, which he later assented to, bringing it into law. Under this controversial law, which was vehemently opposed at the time, it costs taxpayers an average of $3M each month to support Jagdeo.

Using the monthly average for his security, transportation, electricity and pension, it means that Jagdeo to date, since leaving office would have cost taxpayers in excess of $89.9M

This $89.9M figure does not take into account all of the other expenditure incurred by Jagdeo under his ‘Pension Package.’

Apart from what has been disclosed, Jagdeo is also entitled to, under the controversial law he enacted: expenses incurred in the provision and use of water; telephone services at the place of residence in Guyana; services of personal and household staff, including an attendant and a gardener; services of clerical and technical staff, if requested; free medical attendance and medical treatment or reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by him for the medical attendance or treatment of himself and the dependant members of his family; toll-free road transportation in Guyana; an annual vacation allowance equivalent to the cost of two first class return airfares provided on the same basis as that granted to serving members of the Judiciary; and a tax exemption status identical to that enjoyed by a serving President.

It is what happens in instances of absolute power. Where Hughes and Ramjattan can show they have the necessary moral provenance to constrain parasitism is to call for constitutional reform to enhance the loopholes to checks and balance.

What is also clear is the idea of "political voice and exit". These are democratic features that are completely absent in our democracy. Someone needs to write a feature on what are these, their relevance and how they are achieved in democracies.

Maybe if Jailll needs to show up TK he can take it up. If TK is watching and has the time he cans do the necessary research and comparative analysis to with our political culture.

Me mamoo say the same thing.

eh eh, them jumbies coming out of the wood works like ants.

Welcome Jumbie No. 3 JB.

Serious point

Bharrat jagdeo is not doing anything Ramjattan or Nigel Hughes wouldn't do.

Human flesh is not to be trusted period.  But we have to give bigger men like Ramjattan and Nagamootoo the benefit of the doubt.

After Amaila, I do not know about the Hughes.

All these jumby stories scaring me.  Yugi22 How about you?

All former Presidents must live humble lives. 

He has no shame.

Huges is untrustworthy and is a liability to the AFC.

Emperor Jagdeo is a liability to the nation. It's highly likely that Guyana may have 3 Presidents on pension at the same time in the not too distant future. Will the unborn afford to pay?

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.

This is one for a Book of Quotations.

Thank you, yuji.

President or anyone must live as they determine best for themselves and that is constrained only where standard limits of morality and ethics converge. This one has determined that he has a right to be parasitic. However, that is because he is a spawn of the PPP and comes with their genetic make up. They are parasites.

Yugi,do you think you can convince Jagdeo to offer some scholarships to poor students in Berbice?