T&T President receiving tax-free housing allowance while living in state accommodation

(Trinidad Express) Attorney General Anand Ramlogan has put in the hands of the Solicitor General’s office the issue of the President’s receipt of a TT$28,000 tax-free monthly housing allowance while also receiving State-provided accommodation.
“This is an unfortunate occurrence,” Ramlogan said yesterday.
Speaking to the Express, the Attorney General said the matter had been referred to him by Finance Minister Larry Howai.
“Minister Howai has referred this matter to my Office for advice and I will ask the Office of the Solicitor General to provide some guidance and clarification to the Chief Personnel Officer on this matter,” he said. “Let the Solicitor General’s office decide.”
He said the Solicitor General’s office would be capable of providing much needed (legal) advice based on the relevant facts from both sides—the CPO and the Office of the President. He added that the Solicitor General is the legal adviser to both the office of the CPO and the Office of the President.
He appealed to people not to jump to conclusions since the President was “constrained” from speaking out publicly on the issue.
Head of the Public Service and permanent secretary to the Prime Minister, Reynold Cooper, told the Express yesterday he had received a report from the CPO, which he had shared with the Prime Minister. He said he had a view on the matter which he also shared with the Prime Minister.
Earlier in the day, speaking at a news conference called to announce the State’s legal victory in the matter of the legal challenge to the Constitutional Amendment bill, the Attorney General noted that the key players involved in this matter were the CPO, his Excellency and the Office of the President.
Asked who would bear political responsibility for this issue, Ramlogan said Government had to operate in accordance with the constitutional lines of demarcation. He said the office of the CPO was an independent one and the Government had “no sway or say” over the CPO.
“So if the Chief Personnel Officer gives a ruling in a matter, the Government quite frankly would be out of place,” he said.
Told that the CPO’s ruling was a variation and interpretation of the SRC (Salaries Review Commission) Report as approved by the Cabinet, Ramlogan repeated that the office of the CPO was independent.
“If the Government were to intervene or interfere in matters concerning decisions which fall under the jurisdiction of the Chief Personnel Officer, the Government would be accused of unlawfully interfering in a matter that does not concern itself. The CPO having ruled in this matter, these questions would be more appropriately addressed to the CPO who can best advise on what principles governed her decision and what considerations were brought to bear”.
Reminded that the CPO reports to two line ministers (the Minister of Finance and Public Administration), the Attorney General again suggested that the media talk to the CPO. Both line ministers have stated they knew nothing about the decision of the CPO to authorise payment of the housing allowance.
“The Government really had little or no role in the matter. In fact we learnt about it from the media reports. And seeing that the Chief Personnel Officer gave advice in the matter, which was relied upon by his Excellency, I would prefer to leave that matter to be sorted out in the usual process, through the office of the CPO.
“If the CPO has a particular view upon reflection, then that would be a matter for her to raise with his Excellency. But at the end of the day it was the Chief Personnel Officer who committed herself in writing to giving the green light for the (housing) allowance to be paid.
“I can tell you that at the time that was done, I don’t know what facts and what considerations operated in the mind of the Chief Personnel Officer. So the Government does not wish to speculate on a matter that it is not clear about in terms of the factual matrix that operated in the mind of the CPO,” he said.
Chairman of the Public Service Commission (PSC), Marjorie Thorpe, said yesterday the PSC could not take any action in this matter. “Nothing has come to us. We will wait until something (a complaint) has come…then we would proceed to investigate it,” she said.
The President’s secretary had raised the issue of the housing allowance with the CPO, seeking an interpretation of the Minister of Finance Circular, which gave executive authorisation to pay the terms and conditions as recommended by the SRC and approved by the Cabinet.
As a consequence of this, the CPO approved the payment of housing allowance to the President, despite the fact that she noted in her correspondence, dated July, 9, 2013 that “as a principle where an office holder is provided with accommodation by the State, a housing allowance is not payable for any period during which he/she is provided with such accommodation”.
She said given the “particular circumstances” of the President, who is being housed at the State’s expense at Flagstaff Hill (in four units) while renovations are being done to the official residence, the allowance should be paid to him.