This week we asked the man and woman in the street for their views on the controversial 50% increase for some ministers in the APNU+AFC coalition government. Their comments follow:
Stanislaus Szala: ‘I think it’s ridiculous. It’s uncalled for and even if it is called for, it’s too early. The last thing I heard [Minister of Governance Raphael] Trotman say is that he wanted the people to have faith in them. We had faith in you to put you in power and you need to show us the reasons you should be there. For instance, I’m a security guard, my minimum wage is $35,000 and the raise in pay gives one minister $27,000 a day—you see how far it is from my month? Then, the 50% to me, seems to be in line with the 50th anniversary that only the ministers and the government people are celebrating. For the 50th year of Independence they get a 50%, so the good life speech seems to be just for the politicians because it went across the board to the opposition leader and the parliamentarians and at the end of the day, what did the public servants get? Five per cent. So I think it is very ridiculous. Even if it is called for — not now; because nobody elected you to go in there to seek personal wealth. You claimed that you’re going in there to make a better life for us. Nowhere in the 23 years of these two parties in opposition did they comment about the low rate of pay for ministers. Only when they came into power did they complain about their low rate of pay and compare it to the magistrates. But at the end of the day, in each branch of government—if we can call it the metaphorical engine—the people are the oil. And if you take out the oil, no matter how good the engine is, it will break up.’
Debra De Souza: ‘We voted them in and now they’re claiming that they’re going to pay the ministers because they don’t want them to steal. So what about the poor man that is receiving just the crumbs? What about them? Will they not steal? They have children. Those who’ll get the 50% increase, they have so many benefits going for them. So what about the poor people? They don’t have any benefits, they have their work and that is all. They need to be treated better than that because the thing is, what has the government done to deserve that 50% that they’ve gotten? What have they done for us, to deserve it?’
Ariel Pindar: ‘Since [Vice President Khemraj] Ramjattan and his fellow AFC members joined hands with APNU to form the coalition, I said that there had to be a catch within this thing. With the vendetta they had against the PPP/C, they wanted to become president and now they want to get presidential pay and certain privileges. I don’t know if it’s just to spite the PPP/C but I think they should have at least waited a little before they introduced the increase. It’s just plain and blatant ignorance and maliciousness.’
Danuta Radzik: ‘I think it’s ridiculous. I also think it’s unjust and uncalled for. Guyana—as we all know— is a poor country and in a poor country
the wages should be in keeping with the income the country makes. We know ours is not very high—I think it’s US$3,000, and yet I’ve heard that in a place like Trinidad that has eight times the GDP of Guyana, the Prime Minister’s wages are equivalent to what our Prime Minister’s wages would be. But that is a country that can afford so much more than
we can. So wages and payments and fees and salaries—especially for those in government— must be in keeping with what the country can afford and if the country can only afford to pay its public sector employees between a five and a 13% and whatever are the other percentages that are bandied about—if it can only afford to pay that, well, how is it right that the government then can vote themselves a 50% increase? What they get is very adequate as far as I’m concerned because besides the salary they get a whole host of other things free. They get a housing allowance, or they get a house; they get chauffeurs; they get cars; free utilities; entertainment allowance; free health services, etc. So when you add all of that up, plus what they’re getting, it is adequate. So even if they felt that maybe they could get an increase, it certainly cannot be 50% when there are
people in Guyana right now who can’t or can barely afford one meal a day for their children and the rest of their family members. It cannot be right. We can’t afford it. People of Guyana are paying taxes. The government ministers can only receive money from taxes and things like that, so the people are paying for them. It is just ridiculous and it is unjust and they need to reconsider it and do justice by the people of Guyana who have just gone through 23 years where there was massive corruption. We were told that the treasury was bare. How then can this treasury that’s not supposed to have too much money in it pay a 50% increase to all of these ministers? No, it’s wrong.’
Elton McRae: ‘My thoughts are that it is not really necessary now that the ministers get that 50%, primarily because we’re looking at the state of the
economy. They are claiming that public servants cannot get more than 5% because the coffers were empty. So how come then you can get 50? It means that you are seeing yourselves as different when we are all public servants. I would have preferred if they’d done a scenario where everybody gets a gradual increase to that 50% — whether it’s going to take you five years or four years to reach there, let us do it so.’
Kareem De Souza: For me it’s too soon. It wasn’t in the promise. Two months before they had said that an increase in wages for government ministers was not on the cards and that they were really looking out for the people and public servants to up the wages for. But all of a sudden they made this change
without anyone knowing it and in the statement that followed, they said the ministers had to be paid more for them not to be corrupt. Which is saying that if they didn’t really pay them they would still be corrupt and I thought it was change that they were apparently making.’
Susan Collymore: ‘Two and a half months ago Raphael Trotman said that ministers would not have any raise of pay but now, two months after, here it is they’re having an extravagant raise of pay. So what they’re actually telling the public is that it’s okay; you can live on $50,000 a month and do all that you have to do. Meanwhile, Minister [of State Joseph] Harmon blatantly said that he has no apologies to make to the public and they’re basically saying that $50,000 a month could manage poor people. Now you have the pensioners who’re receiving $17,000 and then when you take off all the subsidies, they have nothing. So what are you telling them? That they can live on $17,000 when you went on the television and said, “I can’t live on $500,000 because that’s what I was paying my assistant when I was a legal advisor.” And now you’re saying that it’s okay for a pensioner to live on $17,000 and pay their light bill and water bill even if they have rent to pay and still feed themselves. Then you’re also saying that it’s okay for public servants to pay their rent, send their children to school, and have additional expenses when you’re having all duty-free concessions and other things like that? It can’t work.’
Joy Marcus: ‘I think it’s ridiculous. I really think it’s ridiculous. Some people have been really living on the breadline for so long and we cannot get any proper increase. We were promised 20% and what did we get? Five per cent. We were told that there’s no money and therefore we cannot get 20%. How is it possible for a 50% increase when there’s no money? And if our President promises us a good life for all, a good life for all means a good life for all. It can’t be a good life for them and not us so this is unacceptable. We don’t get all these allowances or perks that they get, we have to pay for everything. We don’t get free electricity, we don’t get our water bill paid. Why should you say to a person that they must live on $50,000 a month but you can’t live on $500,000 or $700,000 a month? When you look at what they would be earning in a year as against what public servants will be earning in a year, it’s a big difference. I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be paid but they’re saying that they need to be paid well—so what about us? And the remarks of Mr Harmon? I mean, Mr Harmon is very arrogant and that is unacceptable. This government has to be a government of the people, it’s not a government for themselves. But clearly, from what we’re seeing, it’s as if their interests are not really in the people, but themselves. And we will not stand by and accept that. When they wanted us to vote for them, they came to us. There was no arrogance. Why the arrogance now? And then to say that there’s no apology to make? You have no apology to make about how we live once you’re living well? That can’t work for us and we would never accept it. You’re there for merely five months now but you see how important your increase is so what about us who’ve been working for all these years? It is downright wrong. You’re telling people on public assistance they have to live on $6,500 a month, what can that do? What we would like them to do for a couple of days is to step out of their position and step into our shoes and see if they can survive there a day much less a week, and once they can’t do that they need to rethink their position. Also, the comments that Mr Harmon made about paying well so they wouldn’t thief—if that is what you’re saying, then are you saying that you’re governing a country full of thieves? Because you know that the people are not being paid well, so what are you saying? I find it very insulting and unacceptable.’
Elsa Cromarty: Firstly, opinion is that at some point perhaps a 50% increase might be required but at this stage I think that it’s inappropriate. When we voted the PPP out in May, what we demanded was to be treated differently. We want to be treated with respect and not contempt by those who serve us. The ministers need to understand that the positions they hold are service positions. Secondly, the issue of parity has been circulated in the news. Guyana has lost medical personnel and some of the best educators because of the issue of parity. Not so long ago, in January or February, the lecturers and staff at the University of Guyana were on the breadline because of the issue of parity. To date, since the new government was elected, those issues have not been resolved. How much are we paying our teachers? How much are we paying our nurses? How are we addressing our educators? And the ministers just decide that with all of their fringe benefits and a salary that is more than the average educator and nurse that they must award themselves for work not yet done? I think it is disgraceful. And thirdly, and perhaps maybe the essence of all the anger, is that ministers of the government are going to say that they have no apologies to make? They have an apology to make to the public because they lied to us in the first place. They lied to us because they knew they were looking at their salaries and they needed to come to us, the people, and say, “this is our position,” and I’m sure that we, the people, would have been able to engage them on that level.’
Dexter Lindo: I, at first, didn’t have a problem with the increase, just that it’s really bad timing since it’s been five months. Then you promised public servants 20% and gave them five and they’re the ones that are actually paying your salary. Then Joseph Harmon said he has no apologies. So you’re not apologizing to the people who actually put you in there? Then later on you need to be re-elected. You won by what? A mere 5,000 votes? Which I think you probably lost by now because of your arrogance. I think it’s really bad timing; the economy is at a stop right now, there’s nothing going on. Our treasury is depleting rapidly and you said you can’t pull off everything in the 100-day plan because you don’t have enough money, yet you have enough money to raise the salary of ministers and members of parliament and former members of parliament as well, so where is all this money coming from? It’s ridiculously bad timing. Their salary is already big. And then you can’t tell people that you left your very rewarding careers. Before you ran for office you knew the salary, you knew what you were getting yourselves into, you were begging people for votes and now it’s a completely different thing. It’s not enough. I remember Khemraj Ramjattan specifically told the police officers that if they knew the salary was not enough, leave the job. So if they know the salary is not enough, resign.’
