A motion which was piloted by Opposition Member of Parliament Ganesh Mahipaul to get the Clerk and the Speaker of the National Assembly to act more swiftly with submitted motions caused a furore in the Assembly today between Members of the Government and Opposition.

Mr. Mahipaul’s motion sought to amend Standing Order 22 to provide a timeline of four days for the Clerk of the National Assembly and four days for the Speaker to make a determination on questions and motions so that they can be placed on the Order paper in a timely manner and be brought to the House for consideration.

Mahipaul in his motion also requested that Standing Order No. 27(2) be amended to read, “If the Speaker is of the opinion that any notice of motion which has been received by the Clerk of the National Assembly infringes on the provisions of any Standing Order or is in any other way out of order, he or she may, within four (4) days, direct that the Member concerned be informed that the notice of motion is out of order; or  that the notice of motion be entered in the Order Book with such alterations as he or she may direct.”

The Government made clear its non support of the motion with Government MP Sanjeev Dadatin telling the Assembly that the motion infringes on the duties of both the Clerk and the Speaker. 

“Mr. Speaker, the imposition of four days is really and truly an attempt at corruption masquerading as transparency, that is what it is, make no mistake. An aggressive timeline like four days is intended to put pressure on the decision maker, is intended to influence and intimidate the decision maker and should never be countenance in this house,” Datadin said.

But in supporting the motion, Opposition Member Annette Ferguson said the situation at present cannot be allowed to continue.

She explained that when Opposition Members submit motions or questions for reply they find themselves waiting several months for the reply.

Ferguson said taking the motion on board would result in more transparency and a better functioning parliament.

“We should not use this motion for political grandstanding and politicking, but for the benefits it will derive for all of us as legislators,” Ferguson said.

Also supporting the motion was Leader of the Alliance For Change, Khemraj Ramjattan who said that it was necessary to insert a deadline period. He said while the Speaker has Constitutional protection, the people of Guyana must not be forced to wait until the Speaker is ready to apply his mind for answers.

“In this case where we are asking that it be done in a four-day period after you would have gotten it, is fundamental because there cant be any delays or uncertainties because in four days you would made a ruling, if indeed it is disqualified, then it is disqualified,”Mr. Ramjattan said.,

Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, Gail Teixeira defended the Government’s non-support of the motion. She said while the business of the House is urgent, Members cannot dictate a timeline for the Speaker.

“And so even though people have put questions in this Parliament, you have to wait for your order to come up, that is not the government’s doing, that is a procedural point in the Parliament,” Teixeira said.

In closing the debate, Mr. Mahipaul said the non-support by the Government is not surprising, since he believes the same Government has been leading the charge to stymie the work of the National Assembly.

The Government used its majority and the supporting vote of the Joinder List representative, Dr. Asha Kissoon, to kill the motion.

Related posts:

Opposition MP submits parliamentary motion on deadly Mahdia dorm fire Speaker turns down Opposition’s motion to send Government members to Privileges Committee Harmon questions joinder parties sudden “noise” over Parliamentary Committees Government will have to set date for hearing of “No-confidence Motion” -Clerk of National Assembly