… does not affect Jagdeo’s pensionThe National Assembly last evening passed a Bill to slash benefits to former Presidents, but it is unlikely that President Donald Ramotar will put his signature to it and make it law.The government voted against the Bill, with Parliamentarians of the ruling PPP/C arguing that it strips former presidents of their dignity, and that it was a vindictive act targeted at former President Bharrat Jagdeo.Jagdeo was the first to benefit from the handsome retirement package.The Bill passed yesterday does not affect in anyway, the pensions of any former president,Cheap NFL Jerseys, which at current calculations add up to $1.2 million per month.The new Bill was designed to deal with benefits additional to the pension, or, the “perks” as Opposition Parliamentarian Moses Nagamootoo put it.The Bill is intended to repeal a 2009 Act which gives former presidents like Mr. Bharrat Jagdeo unlimited staff and resources. For example, the 2009 law only says former presidents are entitled to vehicles and staff, without specifying a number. The new Bill intends to make the benefits specific.The Opposition argued that the Bill was not vindictive, but that it was premised on “social justice.”Nagamootoo placed it in this context – “You cannot live in a donkey cart economy and want to live a life driving a Mercedes or a Cadillac.”The amended Bill limits a former President to two vehicles to be owned and maintained by the state, as opposed to the unlimited number allowed under the 2009 law.Dr. Rupert Roopnaraine of the opposition alliance, APNU, said that the Bill had to be seen in the context where the rich are being enriched and the poor are being starved.Nagamootoo said that dignity is weighed in quantum of money; it is also weighed on the basis of the multitude of sufferings. He said that the dignity of ordinary Guyanese is being stolen when money is being used to fatten the already well-endowed instead of giving more to pensioners and public sector workers, such as nurses, Policemen and teachers.Carl Greenidge, of APNU, said that the Bill was intended to correct “lawlessness and abuse of power.”Greenidge piloted the Bill and saw it through its eventual passage in the House. He said that it was intended to remedy the deficiencies in the old bill and was not meant to touch the pension of former presidents,Cheap Jerseys From China, which currently amounts to 7/8 of what a serving president collects.Greenidge said that the quantum of the pension is exceptionally generous, and would not have required supplementary benefits, but he said that since the benefits are already on the books, the opposition merely wanted to streamline these.He said that the 2009 law was badly drafted since it committed unlimited and uncapped facilities and services to former presidents.Minister of Housing and Water, Irfaan Ali,Wholesale NBA Jerseys, said that the Bill would serve to discourage others from pursuing the office. But Dr. Roopnaraine dismissed that assertion,Cheap Jerseys, saying that benefits should not be one of the reasons a young person aspires to serve the public.Ali said that it was utter disrespect and disregard for former presidents that the new Bill allots just $5,Authentic Adidas Hockey Jerseys China,000 to cover water, electricity and telephone expenses.However, Dr. Roopnaraine said that looking at the benefits in full, the former President could use some of the money from his pension.Mr. Nagamootoo also dismissed Ali’s contention, saying that no one cries foul over the fact that Parliamentarians only receive $20 to cover their electricity, with no provision for their telephone or water bills.Ali was contending that the amount stipulated in the new Bill would mean that former presidents would only have “two light bulbs” and, as PPP/C Parliamentarian Bibi Shadick muttered from her seat, he would have to cook on “fireside.”Ali argued that the Bill also sought to muzzle the President, since it says that if he earns from work done, he would have to give up his benefits.Dr. Roopnaraine however rebutted that the provision was meant to ensure that former Presidents do not abuse the provisions for partisan political interest.The Housing Minister was up in arms about the fact that the Bill does not allow for medical care for children that might become dependent on the president, such as if he adopts, or if he marries a woman who already has children.The new Bill entitled a former President and his spouse and children to free medical attention and treatment or reimbursement of medical expenses incurred.The Bill says that the medical benefits would apply to “natural children” of the former presidents and spouse, below the age of 18 years. The