Give up veto power, then we’ll talk

THE Opposition UNC is adamant in its call for Prime Minister Patrick Manning to surrender the veto power he currently holds regarding the appointment of persons in the Public Sector, especially the appointment of a Commissioner of Police (CoP) and heads of the Police Service Commission. And once Manning does this, the UNC will be willing to discuss their support of the Police Service Reform bills. This according to UNC deputy political leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar who spoke during a news conference at the Opposition Leader’s office on Saturday.  Persad-Bissessar — MP for Siparia — also revealed that the UNC would soon bring a motion to Parliament calling on Government to revoke the appointment of all members of the Integrity Commission.  The UNC is also preparing a motion calling on the Judicial and Legal Service Commission to investigate the workings of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Saying that Government and Opposition remained divided on the issue of the PM’s veto power,  Persad-Bissessar said this veto power could be used to manipulate and control who is eventually appointed to the CoP post by the Police Service Commission. She said the Opposition wanted a more transparent formula in the appointment of the top posts in the Police Service. In this regard, she suggested the US system, in which people come before a body which enquires into their (the prospective CoP) record. She said Parliament could be this body. She said the UNC was also open to a system where people’s names can be submitted to Parliament and once there is no resolution, they are appointed. Persad-Bissessar stated that she  ended 2005, “exceedingly disappointed” with Government’s entire anti-crime thrust.

Government, she said, had not implemented any of the non-legislative measures suggested by the UNC in its document which was handed over to the Prime Minister at the recent UNC/PNM crime talks. Persad-Bissessar said the UNC believed that no one was above the law and judges and the Integrity Commission had to comply with the law. Yet, the Integrity Commission had encouraged judges to break the law, she claimed. She pointed to the conflict of interest which had risen whereby the judiciary was being called upon to adjudicate on an issue in which it  had a clear stake. Noting that the taxpayers would have to foot the huge legal bills over this single issue, Persad-Bissessar stated, “We are wasting a lot of time and money.” She said the issue should go straight to the Privy Council. She then called on disclosure regarding others who had been exempted by the commission, especially since the information about the judges exemption “came through the back door.”