An assertion by AFC MP Sheila Holder that the government has been using the Old Age Pension Pro-gramme to divert public funds riled members of the government benches last evening who sought unsuccessfully to have House Speaker Ralph Ramkarran rule that the accusation be withdrawn.
The accusation came yesterday as Holder made her contribution to the 2011 Budget Debate. While Holder had been scathing about the budget from the inception of her presentation, the atmosphere in the House was relatively calm until she accused the administration of paying “phantom pensioners” funds. Following this statement, angry government members sought unsuccessfully through the Speaker to have the statement withdrawn.
In her presentation, Holder noted that there had been a sharp increase in the number of Old Age Pensioners over the last four years and a consequent increase in government expenditure in this area. Using a self-compiled document to make her case, Holder said that between 2002-2006, data from the Human Services Ministry indicate that the number of pensioners was somewhere between 33,000 and 34,000. However, since 2007, this number increased significantly, with the figure moving to 36,813 in 2007 and 40,389 in 2008. There was an estimated 44,000 pensioners in 2010, she said. At this point Human Services Minister Priya Manickchand said from her seat that while a person may be over 65, he or she only qualifies when they apply.
According to Holder, the Perfor-mance/Value for Money Audit undertaken by the Auditor General on the Pension School showed that approximately 24% of persons 65 and older were not in the ministry’s database and were not in receipt of Old Age Pensions. “The fact that only 76% of persons 65 years and older are in fact in receipt of Old Age Pension also indicates that in 2002 the pensions of approximately 8,000 persons out of 32,000 identified by the census in that age group were being diverted elsewhere,” Holder charged. She said that “this number has increased exponentially since 2006,” while adding that the financial ramifications of this are extremely troubling. However, members of the government heckled Holder, saying that her reasoning was flawed.
“In dollar terms this indicates a monthly difference of over $68M and an annual difference in excess of $824M that appears to have been diverted from the system,” Holder said. She charged too that the number of “phantom pensioners” increased to 17,640 and she alleged that “the monthly hemorrhage from the Old Age Pension fund is over $116M or 1.3B annually.”
At this point, Manickchand objected, saying by the use of the description “phantom old age pensioners” it led to the interpretation that the government is paying money to people who do not exist. She asked that if Holder could not produce any evidence that the Speaker rule that she retract that statement. While Ramkarran overruled Manickchand’s objection, a defiant Holder insisted that she would not apologise.
“That is exactly what I am saying,” Holder said. “I will retract nothing Mr. Speaker. I am prepared to give the report to study to the Honourable Minister and to the Auditor General,” she said. Ramkarran said there was no violation of the Standing Orders that would require her to stop.
PPP/C MP Gail Teixeira then enquired about the report that Holder kept referring to, since the members in the House were unclear. “This was a study that was done by me,” Holder said before being interrupted by a huge outburst from the government side. She then said that the study was based on the question that the Minister answered in the House, the Auditor General Report and the census. “It’s all legitimate. It is a simple deduction…a simple matter of Mathematics,” she said.
Manickchand then asked whether there was not grounds for the statement to be withdrawn since Holder had admitted to making the report up. Ramkarran disagreed, saying that the member had not admitted to making the report up.
Teixeira, also the presidential advisor on governance, then argued that Holder was imputing improper motive on a member of the House, an argument which did not find favour with the Speaker. “The objection that has been made by the Honourable Member Ms Manickchand is that the Hon member said that there were phantom persons receiving benefits. That is the objection she made. That does not impute any improper motive to a member,” Ramkarran said.
Teixeira then argued that Holder had done this when she said that the funds had been diverted away from the pension programme. The Speaker, however, did not budge from his ruling.
Manickchand then took to the floor again and argued that that as a head of the ministry in question, Holder had been imputing that she had been diverting funds. This was again overruled by the Speaker.
A few minutes after Holder continued her presentation, Finance Minister Dr Ashni Singh sought to ask Holder a question, but Ramkarran said that this could not be allowed.
Following Holder’s presentation, Ramkarran asked that she submit her report to the National Assembly.
During the earlier part of her presentation, Holder had described the budget as one which provided the opportunity for the administration to invest heavily in capital expenditure so as to ensure their political survival. She then proceeded to highlight several concerns she had in the health and electricity sectors, among others.
In relation to the concerns raised by Holder in the electricity sector, Commerce Minister Manniram Prashad said that the government stated clearly in the budget that it was moving to improve this sector. He noted the significant expenditure made in 2010 in this sector and plugged the Amaila Falls Hydropower Project.
