LUCKY ACTED CORRECTLY

Gillian Lucky, United National Congress (UNC)Member of Parliament for Pointe-a-Pierre, acted in accordance with the integrity of her profession when she signed the Report of the Privileges Committee which had investigated allegations by fellow Opposition MP, Chandresh Sharma, that he had been physically assaulted by Minister of Housing Dr Keith Rowley. Ms Lucky was one of the two Opposition UNC MPs, who were members of the Committee. Under the normal Parliamentary Committee system, a Member of Parliament, whether Government or Opposition, is expected to vote according to the dictates of his/her Party, in much the same manner as would obtain when there is a division in the House of Representatives. The same would apply with an Opposition or Government Senator with respect to voting in the Upper House.

Nonetheless Gillian Lucky, based her decision on the evidence presented before the Committee. Because the Privileges Committee acts as a court when it meets, she chose to make her decision on the basis of facts rather than party allegiance. As a member of the Privileges Committee she was acting in a judicial role and, undoubtedly, her training as an attorney-at-law would have reinforced this. Many persons speak loftily of the Westminister system but in crucial situations some fail the test.  Ms Lucky and other Members of Parliament, Government and Opposition, would be subject to Party dictates with respect to voting on an issue in the House or on a matter before the average House Committee, but it should be unthinkable that any MP should seek to insist on this in the case of the Privileges Committee.

Indeed, inasmuch as the House of Representatives (through its Privilges Committee) is acting as a Court of Law this would be tantamount to say, interference with the truth in favour of party loyalty. In our society of course, party allegiance takes priority over integrity in almost every instance. On Thursday night when taken to task by the UNC, Gillian reportedly stormed out of a United National Congress caucus at the Rienzi Complex, during discussions on the report of the Privileges Committee. Ms Lucky had signed the 188-page report which had indicated that there had not been enough evidence to support Chandresh Sharma’s claim that he had been assaulted by Dr Keith Rowley.

Another Opposition MP, Mr Kelvin Ramnath, declared on being questioned by a reporter that no one was questioning the integrity of Ms Lucky. Clearly, the issue here is not one of the questioning of Ms Lucky’s integrity, because her integrity with respect to her signing of the report could never have been considered by any one to have been in question. Ms Lucky reached a conclusion based on the evidence presented before the Privileges Committee, of which she was a member. For that matter, after studying the evidence she may have decided otherwise. What matters is that Ms Lucky acted independently in the cause of fairness. She acted correctly.