Examples in Parliament?

BY NOW the country must be asking, what does the Opposition United National Congress hope to achieve by its obvious strategy of non-cooperation, confrontation and cuss-out? Last Friday's emotional display by Mr Kelvin Ramnath in the House seems only the latest in a series of incidents which create the distinct impression that the UNC is now set upon a policy of disruptive outbursts that can do the country no good. Mr Ramnath's angry and totally unjustified defiance of the Speaker made no sense unless, of course, it was part of an orchestrated plan to sow confusion. The member for Couva South is an experienced parliamentarian who should know that the Speaker has no authority to stop a member from quoting the facts contained in any report. If Mr Ramnath wanted to deny Minister Robinson-Regis's statement that, during the coup attempt, he had taken the amnesty from the House for acting President Emmanuel Carter to sign, then he could have done so on a point of order and even later re-emphasise his refutation when it was his turn to speak.

Instead Mr Ramnath chose to defy the Speaker in a most obnoxious way, standing up and shouting at him, daring the Speaker to suspend him and declaring his contempt for the Standing Orders. Mr Ramnath's conduct in the nation's parliament sets the worst possible example for the rest of the country. It was the kind of abusive behaviour which should have been severely dealt with by the Speaker who, in fact, proved to be disappointingly inept, reducing himself to a cypher begging the unruly member to behave. Speaker Sinanan must understand his responsibility to maintain order and decorum in the House, and if he does not have the courage and determination to do so, to enforce requirements of the Standing Orders, then our advice to him is to seek another job. Barring good-humoured banter and picong, sessions of our parliament, where the nation's business is conducted, must uphold the highest standards of conduct among members, otherwise we would be undermining the good order of the entire society.

Mr Ramnath's outburst in the House followed another unseemly display in the Senate last Tuesday when a heated shouting match between Leader of Opposition Business Wade Mark and Minister of Science Danny Montano caused the session to be suspended. Whatever grouses Mr Mark may have had in the government's last minute changes in bills to be debated, it could hardly have justified his disrespect to the President by addressing her while sitting down and in hurling racial slurs at Minister Montano. What really is this all about? The spectacle of senior UNC representatives being unable to contain themselves in Parliament, lapsing into personal abuse and rejecting the opportunity to score their points in a responsible fashion, must provoke disturbing questions. Now we have Opposition Chief Whip Mr Ganga Singh declaring that if the Lindquist investigation into the Waterfarms affair does not reveal any corruption in WASA it would then mean a cover-up by the Government.

Even before he has presented his "evidence" to the independent inquiry — which he, himself, has called for — Mr Singh is determined to have it both ways, by talking about a cover-up. Instead of taking the “evidence” he claims to have about this questionable $51 million payout by WASA to the Police or the DPP or the Attorney General, Mr Singh uses the privilege he enjoys in the House to publicly accuse a number of prominent persons, two of them closely associated with the PNM, of complicity in a conspiracy to defraud WASA of $29 million. It will be recalled that when charges of corruption were made against the UNC government under Mr Basdeo Panday, the stock reply was “take the evidence to the Police.” Now, as they say, the shoe is on the other foot. Will Mr Singh follow the advice of his leader, will he cooperate with the investigation that he himself had wanted? The country will have to wait and see.