Parliament’s constituency office guidelines are merely guidelines and there is no sanction for breach of this, Parliament officials said yesterday.
Yesterday, the PNM raised questions about UNC MP Barry Padarath’s recent statement about repaying $60,000 in salary to the Parliament concerning a relative who had worked in his constituency office.
He said he terminated the person’s employment after receiving Parliament’s manual recently in February. This involves guidelines for constituency office matters and debars hiring of various types of relatives.
This category is more specific than the 2010 guidelines. Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar also said two relatives worked at her office and offered repayment of salaries.
The T&T Guardian learned Parliament officials have been in touch with MPs on the issue. Last Friday following the dismissal of Marlene McDonald—on allegations including a constituency office hiring matter—MPs were given a questionnaire, dated March 18, by the Parliament.
They were asked to indicate if any family was on the constituency office payroll. Deadline for submission is March 28. It is understood the Parliament will undertake any review of the guidelines if any is necessary after Easter.
Parliament officials said when a new Parliament begins, MPs could ask for review of guidelines and sometime things could be changed. But a review wasn’t yet done for this term. The Parliament has auditors who make enquiries of processes done by constituency offices and if there is something obvious, MPs are asked about it.
They added their Human Resource Department was examining whether there was any process for repayment of monies offered by the UNC MPs. Officials said in the last Parliament, an MP had a brother-in-law working at an office.
They said there was a lot of unwritten codes of conduct but if a situation was questionable, MPs were told the situation could get them in difficulty.
Saying the Parliament does not police MPs, they said persons in public life and handling taxpayers’ funds as well as MPs, should understand what was required and do the right thing .
“How well they stand scrutiny will support whether a person is fit for office. In time one learns the consequences of one’s act,” they added. —GA