Barry accuses PNM of political hypocrisy

Ke­jan Haynes

Lead Ed­i­tor- News­gath­er­ing

ke­[email protected]

Leader of gov­ern­ment busi­ness Bar­ry Padarath has ac­cused the Op­po­si­tion Peo­ple’s Na­tion­al Move­ment (PNM) of po­lit­i­cal hypocrisy, re­ject­ing claims by Op­po­si­tion Chief Whip Mar­vin Gon­za­les that the Gov­ern­ment abused par­lia­men­tary rules to shut down de­bate in the Low­er House last week.

Padarath is­sued the re­sponse af­ter Gon­za­les wrote to House Speak­er Jagdeo Singh, al­leg­ing that the Gov­ern­ment ma­nip­u­lat­ed Stand­ing Or­der 52(1) to pre­ma­ture­ly end de­bate on a pri­vate mem­ber’s mo­tion brought by Laven­tille West MP Ka­reem Mar­celle. The in­ci­dent prompt­ed Op­po­si­tion MPs to walk out last Fri­day, with Gon­za­les de­scrib­ing it as a “dan­ger­ous de­vel­op­ment in par­lia­men­tary democ­ra­cy.”

But Padarath yes­ter­day dis­missed the crit­i­cism as po­lit­i­cal the­atre and ac­cused the Op­po­si­tion of se­lec­tive mem­o­ry.

“The Peo­ple’s Na­tion­al Move­ment has once again proven that when it comes to po­lit­i­cal hypocrisy, they are tru­ly in a class of their own,” Padarath said.

“The PNM is not out­raged be­cause a rule was bro­ken. They are out­raged be­cause the very rule they once used with ease has now been used against them.”

He point­ed to a sit­ting of the House on Jan­u­ary 27, 2021, dur­ing de­bate on a mo­tion of no con­fi­dence in the then min­is­ter of na­tion­al se­cu­ri­ty brought by then op­po­si­tion leader Kam­la Per­sad-Bisses­sar.

Hansard records show that then health min­is­ter Ter­rence Deyals­ingh rose and told the Speak­er, “Madam Speak­er, in ac­cor­dance with Stand­ing Or­der 52(1), I beg to move that the ques­tion be now put.”

Then speak­er Bridgid An­nisette-George ac­cept­ed the mo­tion and the House pro­ceed­ed to a di­vi­sion, with the gov­ern­ment ma­jor­i­ty vot­ing to end de­bate.

The Hansard shows there was sim­i­lar “out­rage” in 2021, where the Unit­ed Na­tion­al Con­gress op­po­si­tion had dis­agree­ments, called for clar­i­fi­ca­tions, and en­gaged in crosstalk but there were no walk­outs or ac­cu­sa­tions of dic­ta­tor­ship. Im­me­di­ate­ly af­ter the mo­tion was moved, Dr Roodal Mooni­lal in­ter­ject­ed, ques­tion­ing the fair­ness of end­ing de­bate, not­ing that the mover of the no-con­fi­dence mo­tion was present and pre­pared to wind up. Sev­er­al MPs, in­clud­ing Pen­ne­lope Beck­les and Faris Al-Rawi, re­quest­ed clar­i­fi­ca­tion on the ques­tion, ar­gu­ing that some Mem­bers were out of the cham­ber. The Speak­er re­peat­ed­ly re­mind­ed Mem­bers to sit, keep qui­et, and re­spect vot­ing rights.

The op­po­si­tion PNM com­plained last Fri­day that Stand­ing Or­der 15 pro­vides that a min­is­ter may move that the House ad­journ af­ter the con­clu­sion of ques­tions to min­is­ters. On Pri­vate Mem­bers’ Day, ex­cept with the agree­ment of the Op­po­si­tion whips, the House is not sup­posed to be ad­journed ear­li­er than 6 pm. The de­bate was wound up around 4.30 pm. The 2021 de­bate wrapped up around 8 pm.

How­ev­er, Padarath yes­ter­day said, “Stand­ing Or­der 52(1) ex­ists to al­low the House to move a mat­ter to a vote once de­bate has been suf­fi­cient­ly ven­ti­lat­ed. What the coun­try wit­nessed last week was not the col­lapse of democ­ra­cy. It was some­thing far more pre­dictable, a par­ty that once wield­ed pow­er with­out hes­i­ta­tion now cry­ing foul when the same rules of Par­lia­ment ap­ply to them.”