MPs not to get ‘retirement benefit’
Sep 18, 2017-Rejecting calls from lawmakers across the party line to provision state facilities for retired MPs, a subcommittee of the State Affairs Committee of Parliament has endorsed the Bill on Provision of Facilities for Former Office Bearers.
Members of the sub-panel argued that it was inappropriate to ensure state facilities for retired members of Parliament. The team turned down amendment proposals registered by around half a dozen lawmakers.There is, however, a provision that former members of the Constituent Assembly will be provided free treatment facilities lifelong.Members of the second CA will get a status equal to provincial assembly members. There will be a logo for them in recognition of their role in promulgating the constitution.
The bill has ensured life-time facilities for six top VVIPs of the country. The recipients are the President, Vice President, prime minister, chief justice, Speaker of the House of Representatives and chairman of the National Assembly. The bill will be tabled in Parliament for endorsement after the House committee endorses it most likely on Monday. Lawmakers Tapta Bahadur Bista, Sanjay Gautam, Rajeeb Bikram Shah and Nar Bahadur Chand from the Nepali Congress and Kalpana Chaudhary from the Nepal Loktantrik Forum had registered amendments to the bill seeking retirement facilities for the MPs.
In addition to the Rs200,000 and Rs75,000 monthly for residence, the bill proposes allowances of Rs50,000 and Rs40,000 for former presidents and vice presidents, respectively. It also provisions Rs75,000 in house rent for a former PM, chief justice, Speaker or chairperson of the National Assembly or the CA.
If the bill is endorsed, a former president will get an under-secretary, a driver and a helper throughout their life. The other office bearers will get an officer (gazetted third class) and a driver. All of them can ride state-provided vehicles.The MPs had demanded medical, travel and other expenses post retirement. Santa Kumar Darai, a member of the subcommittee, said the proposal was rejected because the country cannot afford such expenditures.
Published: 18-09-2017 08:07