Leader of the Opposition Dr Godwin Friday maintains that the Unity Labour Party (ULP) did all in its power to prevent the debate on the Private Members’ Motion, brought by the New Democratic Party at the June 22 meeting of Parliament.
The Motion, captioned ‘Covid-19 Pandemic and the Management and Social Consequences of the Pandemic’, called, inter alia, for the establishment of a broad-based task-force comprising persons from various sectors of the economy and civil society, “who would bring insight, experiences and expertise that would help government to fashion meaningful and effective policies and measures to aid and achieve economic and social recovery amidst the COVID-19 pandemic”.
Dr. Friday elaborated, via Facebook, on the content of the Bill after he had left Parliament late Monday. It also addressed the manner in which the funding assigned to COVID-19 relief “is to be managed, and the manner in which society was going to cope with managing the crisis and the recovery process,” he said.
The day’s proceedings closed without any member of the opposition being given the opportunity to discuss the motion.
“These are some important issues that we wanted to debate today, and we put a motion on the Order Paper, and the government again blocked it… They don’t want the matter to be debated; it’s been their practice for the past 19 years of being in the House,” Dr. Friday said.
Under the Standing Orders of the House, Private Members Motions are given until 5p.m to be recognized and debated. If this is not possible, the motion falls. The majority can pick it up at another time.
But Friday contended that under the Standing Orders of Parliament, the motion ought to have been given precedence.
Ministerial statements
During the actual proceedings on Monday, Opposition Parliamentary Representative for Central Kingstown, St Clair Leacock first raised the issue of the Private Members’ Bill shortly after Prime Minister Dr Ralph Gonsalves announced that there was going to be four ministerial statements, inclusive of statements related to COVID+19 by the Ministers of Agriculture, Health and Finance.
About a minute into Minister of Finance Camillo Gonsalves’ statement, Leacock was allowed to inquire “…whether the contribution on COVID by members on the other side could not be incorporated in the debate and or discussion on the motion?”
The Prime Minister Dr Ralph Gonsalves rose to remark that every time the Opposition brought a motion, they expected the rest of the business of the day to go awry, and suggested that it could be accorded if the time permitted.
“It doesn’t mean that because the Opposition puts down a motion that everything else must be vacated,” he said.
Speaker of the House Carlos James said that while he understood the point that Leacock was making, the proceedings were guided by the Order Paper which, at the time, had ministerial statements listed, and that the Motion would be dealt with once time permitted.
Leacock again asked for the ministerial statements and the motion to be discussed together.
“It is clear abuse of the privileges of the House and a denial of the opportunity for this motion that we have,” Leacock asserted.
Opposition Senator Kay Bacchus-Baptiste supported her colleague, saying that the ministerial statements contained information that was also contained in the private motion.
“This is the people’s House and the people’s business; there is only one special time when we have the opportunity to debate a members’ Bill,” she said.
Time runs out
Parliament resumed for the Question and Answer portion at 4:15pm and went on for a further three hours, beyond the 5pm mark.
According to Dr. Friday, although it said that the private members’ motion must be considered before 5 pm, the rules state that any business not reached should stand over to the next sitting.
But Dr. Gonsalves countered, saying that although the motion may be on the order paper for the next sitting, it did not have any precedence because unless it is picked up by a member of the majority, then it falls and has no precedence at the next meeting of the House.
Parliamentary Representative for West Kingstown Daniel Cummings joined in the discussion and accused the government of bringing up all types of shenanigans to “steam roll the intent.
“Some people think that they in government for life, the shoe will be on the other foot. We must not stifle debate, we must allow for the hearing of the voices that are not like ours – that is what Parliament is about,” Cummings proffered.
But the Prime Minister insisted that part of Parliamentary work was to plan time properly.
“The point of it, the opposition actually do not want the motion to be debated, they want it to be said that we did not allow for the motion to be debated,” Gonsalves said.
Similar fates as begot this Motion have characterized early efforts by the NDP to have Private Members’ Motions debated. Among these are the Spiritual, Social and Redemption Charter; Integrity Legislation; Motions on Electoral Reform, and the Motion of No-Confidence. (The Vincentian)