Following a three-month hiatus in parliamentary sittings, the Government on June 5th initiated moves to repeal the Former Presidents (Benefits and Other Facilities) Act 2015 and replace it with a new one that sets no caps to the benefits now being received by those who served in the highest office of the land.
The move has sparked consternation in some circles and raised questions about the government’s priorities.
Senior Minister in the Office of the President with Responsibility for Finance, Dr. Ashni Singh introduced the Bill – Former Presidents (Benefits and Other Facilities) Act 2026 – and it was read for the first time at the last sitting.
According to the explanatory memorandum of the Bill it seeks to put into law certain benefits and other facilities to be enjoyed by every former President.
“Having regard to the services rendered by former Presidents and the dignity attached to the office of the President, it is considered necessary to extend certain amenities and benefits to them during the remainder of their lifetime,” it was stated.
While the Act will empower the finance minister to make necessary regulations for giving effect to the legislation it made clear that Clause 4 of the Bill repeals the one that was passed by the former APNU+AFC coalition government in 2015.
The uncapped benefits that the beneficiaries of the Bill will receive include “provision of utilities at the place of residence, services of personal, technical and household staff, payment of health-care related expenses, for self and dependant members of family, full time personal security and Presidential Guard Service arrangements at the residence and taxable status identical to that of a serving President”.
Commentator Christopher Ram roasted the government over the bill.
In a comment on Friday to Kiskadee Watch, he said “The Presidents Benefits Bill tells you everything about this Government’s priorities. Parliament has sat idle for the better part of four months – no scrutiny, no questions, no relief for the cost of living – and the first thing it stirs to do is restore tax-free, uncapped benefits for the handful of men who have already held the highest office. A former President would again draw utilities, staff, vehicles, security, and medical care without limit, plus a tax exemption identical to a serving President, on top of a pension already at seven-eighths of the sitting President’s salary – while the worker on the minimum wage is too poor even to be taxed.
“We need not even make the argument. We can recall then Finance Minister Winston Jordan, who in 2015 called these very benefits “vulgar” and an entitlement that “degrades servant leadership.” This Bill simply brings back the vulgarity. It shows how the ruling cabal sees the top office – not as a responsibility laid down, but as a plum to be enjoyed for life at the public’s expense. Strip away the talk of “dignity” and what remains is greed”.
In 2015 the then APNU+AFC Government had repealed what it described as a “vulgar” insult to hardworking taxpayers who had had to foot the bill.
At the time the Bill was passed the then opposition – the PPP/C – was not in the House as it was yet to take up the opposition seats in the National Assembly.
The benefits in the previous Bill were enacted by the then Bharrat Jagdeo-led PPP/C administration in 2009 and were defended by then President Donald Ramotar in 2013, when he vetoed a similar bill passed by APNU and AFC to cap benefits.
In 2015 Jagdeo was the only former president who had benefitted under the then Act. Ramotar, former Prime Minister Samuel Hinds, who had served as president for 288 days in 1997 after the death of Dr Cheddi Jagan and prior to the election of Janet Jagan and former President David Granger will all now benefit from the uncapped benefits once the Bill becomes law.
The explanatory memorandum of the 2015 Bill had said that its was to repeal the Former Presidents (Benefits and Other Facilities) Act of 2009, and to replace it with the new Act, to provide greater specificity “especially if account is taken of the fact that the former president is eligible for a pension which is 7/8’s that of the president in office.”
During his address, then Minister of Finance Jordan described the uncapped, taxpayer-funded benefits package set out for former presidents in the 2009 Act as “vulgar”, adding that “It lacks the imprimatur of important moral values”.
Jordan gave the example of a retired graduate headmistress who drew a pension of $86,857 a month after working for over 34 years and which she would receive for the rest of her life. The plight of the teacher demonstrates the “absurdity” of the “anomalous situation,” he had said, where a former president then received $1.4M, which would be automatically increased whenever the sitting president’s salary is increased.
