Premier not ready to give up ‘Greedy Bill’ perks just yet
Premier Dr Natalio Wheatley has stated that legislators must individually decide whether to relinquish payments under the controversial Retiring Allowances (Legislative Services) Amendment Act, commonly referred to as the “Greedy Bill,” when they retire from office.
Speaking at a press conference last week, Dr Wheatley said he would not use the term “Greedy Bill,” explaining that the legislation aimed to correct years of inadequate compensation for lawmakers.
“As Premier and Minister of Finance, I’ve witnessed many former legislators who have served the country well, who are towards the end of their lives in a very dire situation as it pertains to how they support themselves,” he stated.
He explained that up until recently, legislators received a base salary of $36,000, which he said was insufficient for persons serving in the highest offices of government. “The reforms which were undertaken, I believe, were important,” he added.
The Premier acknowledged, however, that some of the provisions were excessive and stated that his government had already taken action to revoke them. “Some of the payouts in the Legislative Service Pension Bill were excessive, and we went to the House of Assembly and revoked those. So future Houses of Assembly would not benefit from some of the provisions of the bill,” he explained.
Dr Wheatley said it would ultimately be for each lawmaker to decide whether to accept or relinquish the benefits, given that they are already legally entitled to them. “Once persons have a right, you can’t take that away. It’s going to be for individual members, in consultation with their families, to make the decisions of what they accept and what they don’t accept,” he stated.
When pressed on whether he had written to relinquish his own payments as he had indicated previously, the Premier said such correspondence would only be appropriate at the end of his political career.
“That letter must be written when persons are ready to retire or they have been retired. I’m not ready to retire right now, and I have no intention of writing any letters,” Dr Wheatley said, adding that he plans to contest the next general election.
Public criticism of the pension legislation resurfaced recently after details of salary increases for lawmakers became public through a recent Auditor General report. The 2021 amendment allowed lawmakers to receive full salary payments for up to two years after leaving office, in addition to other benefits.
The measure was repealed following widespread backlash, but several former legislators from the Fourth House of Assembly remain eligible to receive payments under the original terms.
Dr Wheatley confirmed that information on the total cost to taxpayers would be made available once consultations with the relevant departments were completed.
Copyright 2026 BVI News, Media Expressions Limited. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed.
What’s the big deal most of you just jealous you could never get elected set of cow birds
Do not deserve to run the BVI country let alone push for independence so they can grab more money from our account!
INCOMPETENT GREED + DICTATOR = BAD FOR VI, GOOD FOR HIM
This guy is worse than Andrew Fahie.
Natalio does not tell the truth. Thank you BVI news for showing the clip where he said that he would not take the money and now today he is saying something different. We have an inco***tent, un**thful and l**y person running the affairs of our country. We are in deep trouble people. Deep trouble.
On steroids. Vote this guy out as he only fills his own pockets and travels 24×7 on our dime!
When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.
Whoso is partner with a thief hateth his own soul: he heareth cursing, and bewrayeth it not.
And this is the same chapter 29, Hon. Lavity loved so dearly. These jokers are on the other end of the spectrum. No vision.
We f+c++d!!
Been saying and posting it since they got elected, and those who is seeing it are not wrong.
And, it would’ve been worst iftheir leaderwas still at the head of the thiefing bregade.
From the 1st to the 9th, we still frig though.
It took years for them to decide to give a raise to low income workers, and it took several changes for them to finally settle on the $7.25 or whatever they finally agreed on. Then there are those government workers who haven’t had raises in what I heard was 25 years. But no problem with raising salaries of HOA members because they were being underpaid for a long time. So who isn’t underpaid. Then they try to say that because teachers’ salaries were being raised to $50,000 they had to raise from $36,000 because you couldn’t pay a teacher more than a legislator. Well when I listen to some of the legislators speak it is quite obvious that they aren’t as educated as the teachers. When you insist that a school counselor has to have a Masters and you’ve been paying they wages that do not represent their degrees or years of experience the entire thought process about who is worth what is skewed. In comparison to the long drawn out process to give any group raises the HOA members had theirs in double quick time. And now they get the right to choose to receive or not receive their perks. Whereas no other group government or otherwise is in that kind of position. This is all such crap.
Anyone see the Financial accounts for the last ten years?
They need to publish a list of Government employees salaries and perks over $50k along with the salaries and perks for all ministers.
Welll well mr honorable greedy S can strip this country from all its wealth and fatten his pocket. All you can do that but god has his way to tell em hoe much them going enjoy. Look where Andrew and Carvin is today and aunt jemima Pickering. Let them enjoy while they can. Have fun boys and girls. This country has no leadership. thieving set of losers.
Sawonde, why do you continue to compare yourself to highly qualified civil servants? You are the only politician in recent history to have consultants numbering in the double digits. Not even Ralph O’Neal, during his final days in office, surrounded himself with so many. Ralph also never doubled his travel budget, nor did he behave as petty as you do—insisting on attending every overseas business function that could easily be handled by other senior officials. One thing about Ralph, however, is that he was well-known and respected throughout the Caribbean. His leadership inspired confidence in the BVI, which encouraged investors to bring their business to our shores.
Because of the “greedy bill” you and your colleagues developed—allowing politicians to receive two years’ compensation after serving just one term, or a lifetime pension after only two terms (a mere eight years)—politics has now become the new gold rush in the BVI. Instead of being motivated by service to the people, many will now see political office as a quick path to wealth. And as the Bible warns, greed destroys a nation—sadly, the BVI seems to be heading swiftly in that direction.
Is it fair that civil servants must work 25 to 33 years to earn a pension, while a politician can serve just eight years and walk away with theirs? Civil servants must also wait until age 65 to receive their benefits, and too often, many don’t even live to see that day because of the stresses of life.
Where is the Governor and the UK government in all of this? If the UK truly has its foot on the neck of the BVI, then how can they allow this government to double its own pay while overtaxing an already burdened population? Governor, the ball is in your court. You must ensure that if this “greedy bill” is not repealed, at the very least, politicians should not be allowed to receive their retirement benefits before the age of 65—just like civil servants.
Sawonde himself once said that seniors were putting a strain on Social Security. So how does he justify politicians receiving retirement benefits worth millions of dollars? What kind of strain will that place on the system?
Wake up, my people! Do not cast another vote until the Greedy Bill is revoked.
When the election comes around he’ll go back to saying that he won’t collect a penny from the greedy bill.
truly a despicable set we have leading us I glad bvi news put what he said in 2021 right under what he’s saying now.
Drop the salary for life this is unacceptable. No Job ever offers to pay you after you leave the job. THis is corruption at its highest.The vote was kept quiet as they knew that the voters would be upset.
The addition medical cover should be dropped also.
I have $200 per month full medical cover. Now the NHI is $200 per month and the top up cover is $200 per month. So were worse off under NHI. Plus there are caps etc. If its fit for the people of the BVI then you dont need additional cover. If you need this cover you should apply to everyone contributing to medical insurance.
One rule of the people and one rule for the politicians.
Is the minimum wage next? To the top hourly rate too
A politician making 3 k a month and every day somebody knocking on his or her doors begging for handouts , do you people on here talking BS think that’s a fair salary?
Well look at the history of retired politicians, most of them leaves office worst off than when they came in. Shut up and give all of them 250k a year
I give up a high paying position for a job whereby the culture that exists calls me night and day, follows me around while I am trying to just shop for groceries to go cook a meal and AYO expect to attract talent for $36k USD per annum?!?! Madness!
Yes, I agree that may have not and are not deserving of such responsibility and payment for underperforming. Yes, I agree that the ‘golden parachute’ that currently exists for certain eligible individuals (mind you not all qualify) is not feasible in today’s financial environment where most families are finding it hard to make beds meet; including the pensioners!
The government side has not made any major in-roads in the local economy so far as that the people feel relief and confidence in their management and legislative direction. The public confidence is diminished due to what?
Ask yourselves if things have gotten better I. The last 5-10 years and if so hit a