Tag: parliament

Customs bill passed

The Maldives’ Customs Bill proposed by the government was passed today with 41 votes in favour, 23 against and two abstentions.

Originally submitted by ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Eva Abdulla, the legislation would take customs employees out of the civil service as uniformed state employees.

While a minister appointed by the President is to be in charge of customs, day-to-day functions will be overseen by a Commissioner General of Customs.

Once ratified, a Customs Integrity Commission will be instituted to exercise oversight of the border control institution.

The legislation also specifies stiff penalties and fines for attempted smuggling and import duty evasion while also authorising customs to either fine offenders between Rf10,000 (US$778) and Rf240,000 (US$18,670) or face up to two years in prison.

Also at today’s sitting, a bill proposed by minority opposition People’s Alliance (PA) MP Abdul Azeez to protect the Dhivehi language was passed with amendments after the legislation was vetoed by President Mohamed Nasheed.

Debate meanwhile continued on amendments to the Tourism Act proposed by opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Ahmed Mahlouf to strengthen security at tourist resorts.

A code of ethics for MPs proposed by Independent MP Mohamed Nasheed and reviewed by committee was not passed after 37 MPs voted against and nine abstained.

The code was sent back to committee for further review after neither committee recommendations nor five amendments proposed on the floor garnered majority support.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Deputy speaker would “welcome” heightened transparency in the Majlis

Deputy Parliamentary Speaker Ahmed Nazim has claimed that he would welcome moves to promote transparency in the People’s Majlis, such as revealing the financial assets of MPs to the public, but added similar commitments would also be needed from the country’s judiciary and executive.

Speaking to Minivan News earlier this week, Nazim, who is also a serving member of the People’s Alliance (PA) party and the Majlis’ Public Accounts Committee, said he would “fully support” any initiative to improve the image of parliament such as providing details of the property and assets of MPs. However, the deputy speaker said he believed that the appointment of an auditor general, a position that has been vacant since March 2010 when Ibrahim Naeem lost a parliamentary no-confidence motion by 43 votes to 28, was needed to oversee such a process.

The claims were made as debate over whether MPs should publicly declare details of their assets and income was found to have reached an impasse, with opinion divided in the Majlis over whether doing so was a constitutional necessity.

The issue had also been raised by the political NGO, Transparency Maldives, which claimed that it was having difficulties in getting details on the assets and financial status of MPs despite parliament showing a generally more open attitude to supplying information.

The NGO, which operates a project called Parliament Watch alongside the Maldivian Democracy Network, believes that the right of the public to know the financial details of their elected representatives in the Majlis was “in the spirit” of the constitution. Transparency Maldives added that it believed that transparency within the actions and decision making of parliament had nonetheless improved in recent years despite possible concerns about MP finances.

Although the decision for public declarations of MPs’ financial statements was rejected this week, parliament also failed to agree to two additional recommendations that financial statements should be released only under a court order or to the public upon investigations by state institutions.

On Tuesday (April 19), Nazim in his capacity as deputy speaker of the Majlis, said the matter had been declared “void” on the basis that neither proposal was accepted by MPs, but he added that parliament’s Secretary General had sought counsel on the matter and would go ahead according to the “rules of procedure”.

Speaking before the vote, Nazim said that the issue had been sent to parliament by the Majlis’ secretary general over concerns about an isolated issue raised by the country’s Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) in requiring the financial statements of one unidentified MP.

Under present standing orders that outline parliament procedure, the deputy speaker claimed that sitting MPs were required to provide information to the Majlis by the end of October each year detailing their annual finances between the twelve months from May 29 to May 28.

Nazim said that amidst the ensuing debate over whether these statements should be made freely available to the public, the decision to do would definitely serve to “improve the image of parliament.”

While provisionally welcoming the initiative, Nazim claimed that he believed the Majlis would only public release details of their financial status alongside a similar commitment by judges and senior cabinet ministers.

“It would be for the auditor general to collect this [financial] information from cabinet ministers, judges and government members,” he said, accepting that the position had been vacant for more than 12 months.

“No [financial] information has been put into the public domain, once this happens the Majlis would consider following suit.”

Presidential Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair told Minivan News that ultimately, the decision on whether to make the financial statements of MPs available to the public was down to parliament itself and not related to the government.

“It all depends on how transparent they [parliament] wish to be,” he claimed. “There are opportunities to be accountable, yet holding back on these details might lead to allegations [of possible corruption].

When asked whether cabinet member were themselves considering or already required to reveal details of their earnings and assets, Zuhair added that the issue related to a very different kind of social contract that they were bound to.

“Government employees are banned from working in the public sector or within any positions that might create a conflict of interest,” he added.

Aiman Rasheed, Projects Coordinator for NGO Transparency Maldives, claimedthat MPs were generally operating in a much more transparent manner during the current parliament.  However, he added that while parliamentarians were not required to supply their financial statements to the public, choosing to do so would be more in the spirit of the constitution.

Through its work on the Parliament Watch project, Rasheed claimed that at present NGOs like Transparency Maldives were finding it very difficult to know which MPs submitted their financial statements to the Majlis by the required deadline of October, with requests for a detailed list of members still not being met.

“There is obviously a lot of discomfort about this in the Majlis,” he said. “But for the most part, documents [relating to MPs] are available. As far as we are concerned this parliament is really open.”

Despite welcoming possible improvements in the transparency of the Majlis, Rasheed said that the Parliament Watch project would be releasing a report in the next few months detailing its findings in trying to bring greater scrutiny to parliamentary records in relation to members’ attendances and work rates.

However, amidst the debates over public accountability in the Majlis, a number of MPs have raised criticisms of the role of media in shaping public perceptions of parliament and its work.

(Maldivian Democratic Party) MP “Reeko” Moosa Manik said this week that while he agreed with the constitutional principle of publicly declaring assets and wealth, it was not an advisable time to do so in “today’s political atmosphere.”

The MDP parliamentary group leader remains embroiled in an acrimonious feud with private broadcaster DhiTV, owned by business magnate “Champa” Mohamed Moosa.

Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) MP Riyaz Rasheed concurred with Moosa, claiming that parliament should be concerned about concerted efforts by some media outlets to “disgrace and humiliate MPs.”

“This is not being done by DhiTV’s owner or its management, we know that now,” he said. “But previously we believed that it was planned and carried out by the management there. But that is not the case.”

Echoing a claim made by several MPs in past weeks, Riyaz alleged that unsuccessful candidates for parliament and their family members or associates were behind hostile media coverage of parliament.

“In truth, when the financial status of MPs is made known, some MPs will be worried and others will embarrassed,” said minority opposition People’s Alliance (PA) MP Abdul Azeez Jamal Abubakur.

“That is, those who have a lot of money might be very worried and those who do not will be embarrassed. Therefore, at a time when our status is being revealed in the media, I don’t accept at all that these facts should be available to just anyone.”

Independent MP Mohamed Nasheed meanwhile argued that MPs should not shirk from their constitutional responsibilities by blaming the media. “We will answer in the media to the things said in the media,” he said.

Along with debates over accountability, Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Dr Abdulla Mausoom claimed yesterday that despite the cancellation of a scheduled meeting in the Majlis’ main chamber , work was still ongoing in the parliament, which he believed was playing its part in pushing legislation to allow law enforcement officials to deal with violent crimes, despite certain “public perceptions” to the contrary.

The opposition party MP claimed that parliament was stepping up its workload to ensure the government, as the country’s executive branch, had the right powers and capabilities to uphold the law.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MPs baulk at publicly declaring assets

Parliament yesterday reached an impasse on making MPs’ annual financial statements public after voting against a proposal put forward by the Ethics Committee.

According to Article 76 of the constitution, “Every member shall annually submit to the Secretary General of the People’s Majlis a statement of all property and monies owned by him, business interests and liabilities. Such declarations shall include the details of any other employment and obligations of such employment.”

Tasked by Secretary General Ahmed Mohamed in November 2010 to determine whether MPs’ financial statements should be released to other state institutions upon request, a majority of the 11-member Ethics Committee decided that the information should not be made available unless ordered by a court of law.

In a frenzied debate after the committee presented its report to the floor, MPs were however divided over the need for a public declaration of assets.

While several MPs argued that such sensitive information about MPs’ personal lives should not be made public at a time when “defamation and slander about MPs” were widespread in the media, others contended that the constitutional provision did not give MPs a choice in the matter.

“Some MPs have said the constitution does not say anything about making [the statements] public. The constitution doesn’t say that it should be released only if ordered by a court either, but that’s what we’re trying to do, and it is not acceptable,” argued MP Mohamed Thoriq of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), adding that the information should be published on the Majlis website and accessible to all citizens.

Hamdhoon Abdulla Hameed of the opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) urged MPs to consider that “if this information is not revealed or made public at all, the pointed fingers will be pointing towards all of us.”

Backing the committee recommendation, Minority Leader “Reeko” Moosa Manik said that while he agreed with the constitutional principle of publicly declaring assets and wealth, it was not advisable in “today’s political atmosphere.”

The MDP parliamentary group leader remains embroiled in an acrimonious feud with private broadcaster DhiTV, owned by business magnate “Champa” Mohamed Moosa.

Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) MP Riyaz Rasheed concurred with Moosa, claiming that parliament should be concerned about concerted efforts by some media outlets to “disgrace and humilate MPs.”

“This is not being done by DhiTV’s owner or its management, we know that now” he said. “But previously we believed that it was planned and carried out by the management there. But that is not the case.”

Echoing a claim made by several MPs in past weeks, Riyaz alleged that unsuccessful candidates for parliament and their family members or associates were behind hostile media coverage of parliament.

“In truth, when the financial status of MPs is made known, some MPs will be worried and others will embarrassed,” said minority opposition People’s Alliance (PA) MP Abdul Azeez Jamal Abubakur.

“That is, those who have a lot of money might be very worried and those who do not will be embarrassed. Therefore, at a time when our status is being revealed in the media, I don’t accept at all that these facts should be available to just anyone.”

Independent MP Mohamed Nasheed meanwhile argued that MPs should not shirk from their constitutional responsibilities by blaming the media. “We will answer in the media to the things said in the media,” he said.

Impasse

At the end of the debate, the committee’s recommendation that financial statements should be released only if ordered by a court of law was put to a vote.

While the committee’s proposal was defeated 34 to 25, a motion proposed by Independent MP Ahmed Amir stating that financial statements should not be made public unless it was required for an investigation by a state institution did not pass either.

The MP for Kudahuvadhoo’s motion received 20 votes in favour and 38 votes against.

Since neither proposal was accepted, Deputy Speaker Ahmed Nazim declared the matter “void”.

“However, the Secretary General’s request for counsel on this matter has not been decided one way or the other,” he said. “So the Secretary General will go ahead with it according to the rules of procedure.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

War of words escalate between rival opposition factions

Main opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Abdulla Abdul Raheem has accused coalition partner People’s Alliance (PA) Leader Abdulla Yameen of “trying to destroy the DRP”, claiming that his opposition to the government is motivated by a desire to conceal an alleged illegal oil trade worth US$800 million.

At a DRP Galolhu centre opening on Monday night that saw the war of words escalate between the rival opposition factions, the DRP MP for Maafanu West called on Yameen to swear off claiming to hold the government responsible, because “you are more ruthless and a much bigger thief than that.”

“I will dare to say this, you are a much more ruthless and Jewish person,” he continued. “Don’t come in front of us again and say ‘hold the government accountable,’ we know that behind those devious plans lies the matter of that illegal oil trade.”

DRP Deputy Leader Ali Waheed meanwhile told supporters that they “should not run around forever considering any of our political leaders a god.”

“We don’t believe in a tribe, we believe in principle,” said Waheed, adding that origins or family descent did not matter in “today’s political reality”.

The DRP MP for Thoddoo went on to say that people came out to vote in appreciation of Gayoom’s contribution to the nation, “but it does not mean that [Gayoom] should come back, or that you should endorse your brother [Abdulla Yameen].”

In an appearance on private broadcaster Villa TV this week, Yameen defended his party against complaints of PA using the DRP’s name to organise rallies to promote his bid for the presidency.

“If by holding rallies there, Yameen is being promoted, if they accept that reality, then Thasmeen is free to hold rallies every night,” he suggested.

DRP Secretary General Abdul Rasheed Nafiz told press on Monday that the party has officially requested the Maldives Police Service, Male’ City Council and the Elections Commission (EC) to disallow activities held without official approval.

The move comes after the Gayoom faction organised a rally Saturday night in defiance of a council resolution requiring authorisation before using the party’s logo or seal.

Nafiz warned that the party would have to take the matter to court if the authorities proved unable to resolve the dispute.

In a statement from ‘Honorary Leader’ Maumoon Abdul Gayoom read out at the rally, the former President called on the DRP council – which the ‘Gayoom faction’ has boycotted in protest of Thasmeen’s “dictatorial” leadership – to retract its decision to recommend MPs Ahmed Mahlouf, Ahmed Ilham and Gayoom’s lawyer Mohamed Waheed for disciplinary action.

Faced with similar charges that saw Deputy Leader Umar Naseer dismissed in December, Ilham however contends that “a Deputy Leader can be dismissed only if a third of the party’s congress votes to dismiss him.”

At the ‘Thasmeen faction’ rally, Waheed, one of four Deputy Leaders elected at DRP’s third congress last year, derided his former colleagues claiming that “not even ten people in our rival faction’s front rank possess A’ Level certificates, how can they run the country?”

Spilling over

Meanwhile at Monday’s parliament sitting, MPs of the rival factions exchanged heated words and accusations during the debate on an amendment to the Clemency Act.

DRP MP for Mid-Henveiru Ali Azim accused PA MPs of “using another party’s name and its flag” to hold rallies to attack and undermine the DRP leadership.

Azim was cut off by Deputy Speaker Nazim – presiding over the sitting in the absence of Speaker Abdulla Shahid – who advised the MP to stick to the topic.

Picking up where Azim left off, Ali Waheed raised the issue of appointing a new Auditor General, a post that has remained vacant for a year.

“Are you afraid [to appoint an Auditor General]? What are you afraid of?” Waheed asked the PA Deputy Leader. “Shouldn’t you appoint one [by now] if you’re not afraid of the US$800 million oil and the flags?”

In March 2010, Nazim pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiring to defraud the former Ministry of Atolls Development.

Waheed went on to criticise opposition leaders for being “obsessed with winning power” and “completely lacking sincerity” for solving national problems.

“Opposition parties are attacking Kenereege Mohamed Nasheed. But matters amongst us are worse than Kenereege Mohamed Nasheed, Honourable Speaker,” he said.

Echoing Waheed’s sentiments, Abdulla Abdul Raheem asserted that “you can’t do things in this country anymore the way US$800 million of oil was illegally traded using STO.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Public Accounts Committee summon decision makers over dollar rate revamp

The parliamentary Public Accounts Committee has today summoned members of government and the Maldives Monetary Authority (MMA) to present the research behind a recent decision to amend the set US dollar exchange rate of Rf12.85 to within 20 percent of the figure.

Ahmed Nazim, MP for the People’s Alliance (PA) party and a member of the Majlis’ Public Finance Committee, has said it is scheduled to meet with members of the government and the MMA at 4.15pm this afternoon in order to get an insight into the research and statistical information that led to them taking the decision.

Nazim claimed that under its mandate, the Public Finance Committee was not in a position to call for any amendments to the president’s decision to amend the exchange rates, which have reportedly led to banks charging Rf15.42 a dollar to customers – a rate thought to have exceeded prices offered on the formerly institutionalised blackmarket.

The new exchange rates bought into effect as last week were claimed by President Mohamed Nasheed to ensure “longer term prosperity” in the Maldives.  The decision was praised from the International Money Fund (IMF) as being a “bold step” towards providing more sustainable finances.

Such praise came as the country’s Economic Development Minister, Mahmoud Razee, argued that the artificially fixed Rf12.85 exchange rate on the dollar has meant there was little certainty of the exact value of the Maldivian currency in the present market.

However, this so-called dollar float has also led to derision and protests from different factions representing the main opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) as well as criticisms from some private sector economists that the measures still fail to address the high levels of state expenditure that threaten to shatter any attempts to balance national finances.

Despite the committee itself not being able to propose any amendments to the national interest rate, Nazim said the meeting was needed to ensure the reasons for taking the decision to amend interest rates were just.

“We have been following this [exchange rate] decision and we knew what the situation was.  The committee just want to make sure the correct legal steps were followed,” he said.  “We just have to make sure that they have done good analysis and are aware of the fiscal impact of their decisions in the long term.”

Nazim added that relevant authorities had already responded to the committee ahead of a deadline set for midday yesterday (April 17) to supply data related to the exchange rate decision.

In an article for Minivan News last week, Director of Structured Finance at the Royal Bank of Scotland, Ali Imraan, observed that ‘growth’ in the domestic economy had been driven by the public sector  and “paid for by printing Maldivian rufiya and clever manoeuvres with T-Bills, which the government has used since 2009 to be able conveniently sidestep the charge of printing money. In simple terms: successive governments printed/created money to drive domestic economic growth.”

Imraan pressed for the Maldives to invest in private sector revenue growth “rather than building airports on every island”, and implement a progressive taxation system targeting high earners in the interest of income equality. He also urged the Majlis to uphold the constitutional stipulation whereby MPs – such as those with business interest in the tourism sector – removed themselves from voting on issue in which they had a vested interest, and further suggested that the government resolve the matter of stalled tourism developments “awarded to parties with no money or track record.”

Imraan pressed for the Maldives to invest in private sector revenue growth “rather than building airports on every island”, and implement a progressive taxation system targeting high earners in the interest of income equality. He also urged the Majlis to uphold the constitutional stipulation whereby MPs – such as those with business interest in the tourism sector – removed themselves from voting on issue in which they had a vested interest, and further suggested that the government resolve the matter of stalled tourism developments “awarded to parties with no money or track record.”

“Moratoriums on lease payments or debt repayments may look innocuous enough, but they rob the country of vital growth opportunities and hence ultimately rob the people. We should not stand for it,” he said.

Imraan’s latter suggestion proved somewhat prescient when the Tourism Ministry renewed the lease for Hudhufushi in Lhaviyani Atoll, despite the resort island’s owner owing more than US$85 million in unpaid rent – most of it fines for non-payment.

The government’s decision to implement a managed float of the currency came as a least one local sales agent for international airlines operating in and out of the Maldives closed its doors to customers, blaming an inability to pay the airlines because of a lack of US dollars circulating within the economy.

A local financial expert working in the private sector, Ahmed Adheeb, had also warned that a shortage of foreign currency would reduce the prospect of foreign investment, because of the difficulty of repatriating profits to other countries.

“Dhiraagu, for instance, is probably having a lot of difficulties repatriating dividends to Cable&Wireless,” Adeeb said. “This can lead to a fall in investor confidence. When that happens, foreign investors will either try to exit or stay away. We will only see foreign investment that earns dollars, such as resorts.”

The problem would soon lead to inflation and difficulties importing essentials such as fuel and medicines, he suggested, and could potentially have a major impact if the State Trading Organisation (the country’s primary importer) found itself unable to acquire foreign currency.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament approves amendments to Pension Act

Parliament today passed amendments proposed by government to the Pension Act of 2009 to delay the inclusion of expatriate workers in the retirement pension scheme by at least three years.

The amendment bill was passed with 70 votes in favour and one against. Once ratified, the legislation would mandate the Pension Administration Office to formulate rules within one year for expatriate workers to join the retirement pension scheme.

Meanwhile at today’s sitting, an amendment proposed by minority opposition People’s Alliance (PA) MP Ahmed Nazim to exempt MPs from the scheme however did not pass after 41 MPs voted against it, 29 voted in favour and five abstained.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament endorses Naseem as Foreign Minister and Muiz as Attorney General

Parliament has approved the appointment of Minister of Foreign Affairs Ahmed Nasheed and Attorney General Abdulla Muiz.

Muiz was approved by 74 out of the 76 members present while Naseem received 62 votes endorsing him as Foreign Minister, replacing Dr Ahmed Shaheed.

The appointments mark the end of an extensive cabinet reshuffle prompted by the short-lived resignation of Nasheed’s entire cabinet in July 2010, in a statement against what they described as the “scorched earth” politics of the opposition majority parliament.

However under the Maldivian constitution ministerial appointments are subject to parliamentary approval, and the opposition seized the opportunity to vote out seven of Nasheed’s 13-strong cabinet, and the Attorney General, during a vote in November 2010 that was boycotted by the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP). The vote came after three weeks of disruption in parliament, with some sessions terminated by Speaker Abdulla Shahid – himself an opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP – mere minutes after opening.

Seven ministers – Finance Minister Ali Hashim, Education Minister Dr Musthafa Luthfy, Foreign Minister Dr Ahmed Shaheed, Fisheries Minister Dr Ibrahim Didi, Home Minister Mohamed Shihab, Defence Minister Ameen Faisal and Attorney General Dr Ahmed Ali Sawad – did not receive a majority of votes from the 42 MPs in attendance during the November vote.

The government had contested that the only way ministers could be removed was through a majority vote of no-confidence, and further argued that parliamentary approval of ministers appointed by Nasheed was a “ceremonial” function.

“No consent does not amount to no-confidence,” the President’s Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair argued at the time.

The question of whether ministers could perform their duties without parliamentary approval eventually went before the Supreme Court, which ruled in favour of the opposition. A number of Ministers, including Dr Ahmed Shaheed, resigned on the eve of the ruling.

However the opposition’s victory celebration following the December 2010 ruling was short-lived, and came to blows when Umar Naseer, the party’s dismissed Deputy Leader prior to his dismissal by the party’s disciplinary committee, and his supporters gatecrashed the venue. What had been an acrimonious war of words descended into an outright split of the party into factions loyal to either the party’s ‘honorary leader’ former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, and elected leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali and Speaker Ahmed Shahid.

The MDP saw the opportunity to rush the remaining appointments through parliament while the DRP was absorbed in  internal politics; Thasmeen was accused by Naseer’s more uncompromising faction of “secret meetings” with President Nasheed.

In a vote last month, replacement Education Minister Shifa Mohamed (66 in favour) and Tourism Minister Dr Mariyam Zulfa (71 in favour) were approved by parliament. More surprising was that Home Minister Hassan Afeef and Transport Minister Adhil Saleem were both narrowly approved despite being unpopular with the opposition and claims by the party that it would impose a three-line whip to reject the two nominees. Several senior figures in the President’s Office privately acknowledged that they had held little hope for either.

The only casualty was Attorney General Dr Ahmed Ali Sawad, whom Nasheed had appointed to the post a second time after his first dismissal by parliament, and who was ousted by one vote.

That same afternoon President Nasheed appointed State Minister Ahmed Naseem as Foreign Minister and Solicitor General Abdulla Muizz as Attorney General, the subject of today’s approval, suggesting that the MDP may indeed have gained leverage in parliament at the expense of the fractured opposition.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament overrides presidential veto on capital island legislation

Parliament today voted through a bill on determining atoll capital islands for a second time after President Mohamed Nasheed had returned the legislation for reconsideration.

A motion proposed by opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Ali Azim to pass the bill again without any changes received 39 votes in favour from the 68 MPs present and voting, the bare minimum required to override a presidential veto.

Under article 91(b), a bill returned for reconsideration and passed by a majority of total membership of parliament has to be “assented by the President and published in the government gazette.”

According to the bill, atoll capital islands listed in the appendix of the constitution when it was ratified on August 7, 2008 shall retain their status unless decided otherwise by a two-thirds majority of an atoll council and approved through a public referendum.

The legislation also lays out a number of steps to be completed before relocation could be considered by atoll councils.

Following the local council elections in February, disputes over atoll administrative centres in Shaviyani and Kaafu atolls led to a tense standoff between islanders and riot police.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Mahlouf resubmits resolution cutting Rf20K committee allowance, after MDP forces Mariya to withdraw it

MDP MP and Party Chairperson Maryia Ahmed Didi today withdrew a resolution to cut the controversial Rf20,000 (US$1550) committee allowance from the MP Privileges Bill.

Mariya told Minivan News today that she withdrew the resolution following a vote by the MDP Parliamentary Group.

“I was not at that meeting,” she said, “but I bowed to the party’s rules and took it out. However I told parliament that I did not want the Rf20,000 committee allowance myself and urged group members not to take the committee allowance. That got a good reaction from quite a few MPs.”

Mariya acknowledged that there was strong public sentiment against MPs receiving the committee allowance, including among the party’s own member base, which on top of their Rf 62,500 (US$4860) salaries would place Maldivian MP income on par with that of Sweden.

“The Rf 20,000 committee allowance was in the small print of a report from the monetary committee on the salary of all institutions,” Mariya noted.

Leader of MDP Parliamentary Group ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik was not responding to calls at time of press.

Following Mariya’s withdrawal of the resolution opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Ahmed Mahlouf resubmitted it.

“I was the first one to raise it before Mariya, but the Speaker [DRP MP] Abdulla Shahid went with Mariya’s changes, perhaps because of the factional fight [the opposition] is having. When Mariya withdrew it today I resubmitted it.”

Mahlouf’s submission means the resolution will go to committee stage which will debate the matter before submitting it to the floor for a vote.

Increasing MP salaries by Rf 20,000 would be a huge blow to parliament’s credibility, Mahlouf said, “as the public do not believe we are working to their expectations.”

He said he believed Mariya had been pressured by the MDP Parliamentary Group to withdraw the resolution.

“I decided this by myself. Nobody pressures me any more because I don’t follow DRP Leader Ahmed Thasmeen in parliament,” said Mahlouf, who has sided with the party’s dismissed Deputy Leader Umar Naseer and its Honorary Leader, former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, against Thasmeen’s faction.

The core issue regarding the salary increase, he explained, was the number of people petitioning MPs for money and assistance. This, he said, was the reason he had initially voted in favour in favour of the increase.

It was, he said, “very normal” for him to give away US$2000 (Rf 25,700) of his salary every month, “not only to constituents, but people from other parts of the country. People who are very poor come forward and ask me to please help them, and get very mad at me if I don’t.”

“At first I voted in favour [of the increase] because so many people were coming to me for help. This was something that was done for a long time back, and people now expect aid from parliamentarians. I was not a rich person before I was elected and I can’t give all my salary away, so that was the main reason I voted [in favour]. But maybe the next time somebody asks I can [justify] myself. When the general public are asking us not to do this, we should stop doing it.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)