-dismisses it as mere chicanery
BOTH PERMANENT Secretary in the Office of the President Dr. Nanda K. Gopaul and PPP/C Executive Committee Member, Robert Persaud have provided clarifications in the ongoing saga over the President’s pension, and brushed off the whole brouhaha as mere electoral distractions. Gopaul, in a letter to the press on Friday, has provided details refuting Opposition assertions and statements regarding the pension issue.
“Following this Act # 8 of 2009, Mrs. Hoyte received from 2006 – $347,395; 2007 – $378,660; 2008 – $489,468 and November 2010 – $543,543. Her Excellency, Mrs. Janet Jagan received in 2000 $125,867 per month. From October 1, 2006 she received $729,529 per month,” he said, adding that in March 2009, a Legislator earned $137,938, while an ex-President earned – $876,692.
He noted that former President Arthur Chung got, from October 1, 2006 the sum of $729,529 per month, while the last amount paid in June 2008 was $1,085,427 per month. Chung’s wife, on the other hand, got a widow’s pension of $542,714 up to August 2009.
“In addition,” Gopaul said, “they were entitled to the following: Motor vehicles and drivers; A gardener; Payment of utilities bills (electricity/telephone/water); Payment for security at the residence or the provision of security personnel, Payment of maids;  Payment for medical expenditures; Payment of an Annual Vacation Allowance for Ex-President and Spouse; [and] Duty Free Concession for motor vehicles.”
Meanwhile, Agriculture Minister Robert Persaud has noted with concern that both the Opposition and certain sections of the media “have taken issue with my description of the presidential pension issue as ‘extraneous’ and not a ‘serious’ one as reported in the Stabroek News of Friday, November 11, 2011… [and that] the orchestrated distortions continue in those sections of the media, thus fuelling an escalating media hype that is characteristic of current opposition politicking.”
He goes on to explain that the pension received by the President is the same as the pension received by public officers in accordance with Section 11 of the Pensions (President, Parliamentary and Special Officers) Act, Chapter 27:03 of the Laws of Guyana which was passed in 1969.
Persaud, who’s also PPP/C campaign manager, said that Section 8 of the Act describes those who are beneficiaries, and includes all members of the National Assembly, and that Section 9 makes it clear that this is a contributory pension scheme and the beneficiaries all contribute.
“The question that must be asked,” he said, “is whether it is being proposed that the President of Guyana and all other pensioners who are similarly qualified should now receive less than what they deserve as prescribed by the Pensions Act of 1969?”
Continuing, he said: “It must be reiterated that the President’s salary is the same as the salary of the Chancellor and the Attorney General. One would recall that the Attorney General’s salary became equated to that of the Chancellor when President Burnham decided that he wanted Chancellor Massiah to be appointed Attorney General.”
He had a few pertinent questions for the detractors: “Are the Opposition elements proposing that the pension of the Chancellor, the Chief Justice and the Attorney General must be adjusted downwards? Further, are these Opposition elements suggesting that the pension benefit provided for under the Pension Act of 1969 be amended?”
One should also note, as the Office of the President has revealed publicly that comparatively, he said, that the pension of a President is unlike that of a member of the Judiciary, whose pension is computed based on twice the actual years of service in the Judiciary.
“Are they advocating that all parliamentarians should have a reduction in pensionable benefits for which they had contributed? Can these elements advise whether Mr. Ramjattan and Mr. Trotman and their colleagues in the PNCR agree to a reduction in the Pensions which is calculated similar to that of the President?” he asked.
He noted that according to the Pension Act Section 11 (i) of Chapter 27:03: “The pension payable to any person shall (e) in the case of a person who has served as a legislator for periods amounting in the aggregate to not less than 12 years, be at an annual rate equal to seven-eighths of one year’s salary of that person.”
Persaud said: “What the Former Presidents (Benefits and other Facilities) Act 2009 dealt with was all the other benefits that were previously discretionary. These have now been identified and limited to those that are recognized in the 2009 Act. Past Presidents including Arthur Chung, Desmond Hoyte, Janet Jagan have all enjoyed these benefits which are today codified.”
He said that it is hoped that these facts will educate the public and bring to an end the distraction and misrepresentation foisted on the public by the opposition parties “which have so far failed to present a coherent programme and vision and are manufacturing these issues  as distractions.”