Government cannot now object to a Parliamentary practice

first_imgDear Editor,With reference to a news article titled, “AFC tells members to stay put while it figures things out” in sections of the media, in which it was reported that Mr Raphael Trotman stated the following, more or less, to AFC members: There is also a strong argument that in order to bring a successful “No-Confidence Motion” the lists proposing the motion must first have an electoral majority of its own and not depend on anyone crossing the floor, as this practice is not allowed in our Parliamentary rules. “It is for the Speaker or the High Court, ultimately, to decide.”With respect, Government cannot now object to a Parliamentary “practice” which they ratified or accepted with their intentional participation.Mr Trotman, a most recent and former House Speaker with first-hand knowledge of Guyana’s Parliamentary practices, ought to have objected prior to or during the process, and not now when it has been completed. He never did.Indeed, Mr Trotman was seen by way of video coverage during the process to be imparting commentary and/or advice to the PNC Chairman Ms Volda Lawrence, as she sought a “time out.” No timely objection as to the practice was made then or at any time during the 7-hour marathon debate.Further, the Prime Minister in the post-motion emergency conference which included Mr Trotman, did not object to the practice. In fact, the record shows that the Prime Minister publicly praised the Parliamentary process, and accepted the results.This was followed by President David Granger who, many hours later or on the following day after ample time passed, proclaimed that Government would abide by result. The President did not object as to the practice used or not used.Sincerely,Rakesh Rampertablast_img

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *