Dumas to Opposition: Wrong to ask questions ‘to get your pardners off’

With reports of imminent arrests circulating, the already touchy subject of Bob Lindquist and the $1.6 billion airport caused serious bickering in the Senate yesterday  after Attorney General John Jeremie, who had previously answered questions on Lindquist, refused to answer to a six-part question on the Canadian forensic accountant and his investigations. Jeremie’s decision, which was accepted by Senate President Linda Baboolal, provoked so much argument, contention and ire from the Opposition that during the fiery crosstalk, Government Minister Rennie Dumas told the Opposition that it was wrong to use question time to try to elicit  information “to get yuh pardners off.” Dumas’ shot came as Montano accused the Attorney General of having “improper motives” in not answering the question. The sedate Attorney General replied, to supportive table-thumping: “The Senator should be aware that statesmanship is not showmanship.” “It is wrong to invoke the sub judice rule (to avoid answering the question),” Montano thundered back.

“And it is wrong to come here and try to get information for yuh pardners,” Local Government Minister Dumas fired back. “What! What!” Montano exclaimed in apparent shock. “Repeat that!” he challenged. “It is also wrong to try to get yuh pardners off,” Dumas stated defiantly. “You trying to get they pardners off?  I am not!” Montano roared. During the heated exchanges, Montano accused Senate President Dr Linda Baboolal of protecting the Government. At the start of the proceedings, Jeremie told the Parliament that the information being sought by the Opposition was sub judice because the issue of Lindquist and his relationship to the Government was the subject of  an appeal on a constitutional motion by Northern Construction in the High Court. He cited Standing Order 17 to substantiate his position — that a question cannot be raised about any matter then pending before any court of justice.

Senate President Linda Baboolal admitted that “we missed” that issue (when she allowed the question on the Order Paper.) But the Opposition was not pleased. Mark said the fact that the question was on the Order Paper meant that the President was satisfied that it was important and it was not for the AG “to dodge” it. Robin Montano chimed in, accusing Jeremie of  “hiding behind the sub judice umbrella” and misleading the House in the process. In his characteristically contentious style, the UNC Senator argued that there was nothing contentious about the questions being asked. Baboolal stated that she couldn’t force the AG, especially in light of his explanation — that the matter was sub judice. But every time the Senate President tried to move on to the next question, the Opposition protested. Montano  insisted that Baboolal’s ruling was wrong while Mark repeatedly asserted that Baboolal couldn’t take the AG’s word “as gospel.”

The Senate seemed stuck on the issue and a clearly tired Baboolal decided that she would put the matter to a vote. But Government Leader Lenny Saith intervened, pointing out that once the President had ruled, “that was that. You don’t vote on a ruling.” Baboolal realised her error but Mark was determined to seize on it. The President wanted a vote, and the Opposition wanted to vote on it so the matter was simple, Mark maintained. “We call for a division,” he added. Retracting the decision to have a vote on the matter, Baboolal stated that she accepted the Attorney General’s  explanation and there was no reason to take any vote. “That is a cop-out and it is wrong,” Montano protested, while Mark stated that he wanted to record the Opposition’s strong objections. The Senate finally moved to the next question, leaving for now the tricky issue of Lindquist and the airport investigations.