Economist criticizes PER 2010 Increase

Chief Executive Officer for Chamber of Commerce Mr. Calvin Ziru said the PER over the years until now have become the means of attraction for the parliamentarians.(Pic. Supplied)

By Andrew Fanasia Jr.
Sub Editor
National Express Newspaper

University of the South Pacific (USP) S.I center Economic lecturer has condemned the increases in the Parliamentary Entitlements Regulations 2010.

“The PER 2010 does not reflect well on the current economic state of this country,” Mr. Vincent Nomae told the high profile speakers and members of the public at the debate held jointly by TSI and the University of the South Pacific S.I center.

“This is a pure contradiction to the early statement of the NCRA Government on the expense reduction.”

Mr. Nomae said the country is still struggling to stand on its feet whilst our leaders are craving for more benefits through these entitlements.

TSI have brought to light some of the potential entitlement collected by an average MP which exclude others like pensions, and various other small entitlements such as for drivers, mobile and landline reimbursement, life increase and relocation allowances.

It was understood that maybe one of the justification for such increase is because our Parliament Members need to have these entitlements for them to perform their duty as a leader more effectively.

Mr. Nomae however said, this does not rule out the economic situation the country has encountered

He added that the Parliamentary Entitlement Commission must measure the entitlements of our leaders with our standard Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

Meanwhile, Chief Executive Officer for Chamber of Commerce Mr. Calvin Ziru said the PER over the years until now have become the means of attraction for the parliamentarians.

He added that it seems that PEC as the regulator body did not independently deal with the PER.

On the same issue, TSI Board Chairman Bob Pollard said PER needs to be fair, “the process to award this entitlement must be independent, transparent and fair for the public.”

Most of the public attending the debate on Wednesday were shocked to hear and see the actual amount each member of the parliament receive in terms of the entitlements.