Gail Alexan­der

Did Gov­ern­ment seek to write-off mon­ey mat­ters - to­talling al­most $94,000 - con­cern­ing Ra­j­coomar Bha­ga­loo be­cause he was a de­feat­ed PNM can­di­date for San­gre Grande in re­cent elec­tions?

That's the con­cern Op­po­si­tion Leader Kam­la Per­sad- Bisses­sar yes­ter­day grilled Gov­ern­ment about in Par­lia­ment.

This was dur­ing dis­cus­sion on as­pects con­cern­ing vari­a­tion in the sum of $255.3 mil­lion made to the 2019 Bud­get. Dis­cus­sions were aimed at clos­ing off 2019 ac­counts. The $255.3m sum didn't in­crease that $51B Bud­get.

The Op­po­si­tion took is­sue with an as­pect in­volv­ing $93,536. 18 cents and write-off of the over­pay­ment of salary/cost of liv­ing al­lowance in this sum to Bha­ga­loo over Oc­to­ber 1986 to De­cem­ber 2011 . He was de­scribed in doc­u­ments as a re­tired Rev­enue Of­fi­cer II, In­land Rev­enue (Fi­nance Min­istry.)

Per­sad- Bisses­sar asked if Bha­ga­loo was the PNM can­di­date who was de­feat­ed in San­gre Grande (in re­cent Lo­cal Gov­ern­ment polls). PNM had a can­di­date of the same name in Cu­mu­to-Tamana. Im­bert said he had "no idea' but could check. Per­sad- Bisses­sar said she was ad­vised Bha­ga­loo was the PNM can­di­date.

Im­bert who said Bha­ga­loo was paid at an in­cor­rect stage-point in the salary scale replied he was " hap­py to as­sist" him and oth­ers in sim­i­lar sit­u­a­tions. Per­sad- Bisses­sar asked how many oth­ers were sim­i­lar­ly cir­cum­stanced. Im­bert couldn't say but added there would be oth­ers in and as they arise, the tra­di­tion is to deal with them. He added the mat­ter didn't "have any­thing to do with his Gov­ern­ment" since it hap­pened over 1986/2011.

Per­sad-Bisses­sar in­sist­ed on know­ing the process and if mat­ters "arose" if a per­son be­came a PNM can­di­date .

Im­bert said the "fact that this may be the same per­son who con­test­ed in Sanger Grande" was ir­rel­e­vant as far as he was con­cerned,

"But I'll be hap­py to as­sist him and in oth­er such mat­ters. This mat­ter arose from the Au­di­tor Gen­er­al's work when it was de­ter­mined an over­pay­ment was made," Im­bert added.

Af­ter UNC's Rudy In­dars­ingh pressed on the is­sue, Plan­ning Min­is­ter Camille Robin­son-Reg­is said it was "high­ly in­cred­u­lous and pre­ten­tious" that Per­sad- Bisses­sar would query the is­sue and "be­have as though Bha­ga­loo was plucked out of nowhere when we have over 1,000 teach­ers who were in sim­i­lar cir­cum­stances."

"Is it that if Bha­ga­loo was a PNM per­son, (UNC'd) have said 'no' to pay­ment?This shouldn't be oc­cur­ring - it looks like UNC is tar­get­ting," she added.

Per­sad- Bisses­sar replied, "I find it high­ly in­cred­u­lous and pre­ten­tious the Min­is­ter would say I'm be­ing pre­ten­tious. While the Au­di­tor Gen­er­al would have brought this for­ward, the process would have come to Cab­i­net for ap­proval and this is ap­proved by the PNM Cab­i­net for Mr Bha­ga­loo to get his pay­ment."

Robin­son-Reg­is asked if the UNC was "vex" with Bha­ga­loo af­ter 2011 and didn't "give him his due." Im­bert said the sit­u­a­tion would af­fect­ed Bha­ga­loo's ter­mi­na­tion ben­e­fits, "That's why we're deal­ing with it. He re­tired in 2011. I'm hap­py to as­sist him and all oth­ers in sim­i­lar cir­cum­stances, it doesn't mat­ter if the per­son is UNC, ONR, NAR, once they're a pub­lic ser­vant and TT cit­i­zen- we'll deal with it. What's be­fore us is what was sent to is."

He said the sit­u­a­tion which af­fect­ed Bha­ga­loo hap­pens from time to time, but not fre­quent­ly. On an­oth­er mat­ter Im­bert could­nt give the cen­tral Bank's cur­rnt over­draft fig­ure. He said it was about 80 per­cent last Fri­day but would in­crease by next week due to salaries.