– says it will not allow progress to be stymied
GOVERNMENT has registered its disappointment with the opposition withholding its support for Financial Paper number 8, scoffing at its high-handed flexing of political muscle and power for the sake of demonstrating what the ‘majority of one’ could do in Parliament, notwithstanding the fact that the paper was eventually passed in the House. During Thursday’s sitting of the National Assembly, Speaker of the House Raphael, Trotman ruled that a move by the opposition for the withdrawal of Financial Paper 8 was “out of order”, and this cleared the way for the eventual approval of the People’s Progressive Party /Civic (PPP/C) Government’s supplementary budget spending from last year.
Finance Minister, Dr Ashni Singh, at a news briefing yesterday, said the Government  “welcomed, and was pleased” that the Speaker found  favour with regard to the merits of Government’s argument on this matter.
According to him, Trotman allowed the financial paper to be considered by the National Assembly after he was persuaded, and then unimpressed, by the opposition’s arguments on the matter.
Dr. Singh said it is significant to note, also, that after the Speaker’s ruling, a new attempt was initiated on the floor by the opposition spokesperson on finance, Carl Greenidge, to once again stymie the Assembly’s consideration of Financial Paper 8.
However, Government Members of Parliament objected, making reference to certain Standing Orders that made it clear that Greendige’s attempt to frustrate the financial paper was out of order.
The minister said he is astonished that, notwithstanding the merits of the items on the Financial Paper, and Government’s repeated affirmation of its willingness to answer any questions in relation to the items, the opposition parliamentary parties did not see it fit to give the items under consideration their support.  Neither of the Parliamentary Opposition parties, the Alliance For Change (AFC) or ‘A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), voted in favour of the items listed on the Financial Paper.
Dr. Singh noted that Financial Paper 8 was special in character, since it addressed foreign inflows as all of the items were related to foreign funded projects.
The Assembly has a tradition of unanimous support of foreign inflows coming into the country, the minister reminded.
“There can be no reasonable or rational basis for those items to be opposed, certainly not by an opposition that would like to present itself as a responsible opposition willing to work in the spirit of cooperation,” the Finance Minister chided.
With regards to Financial Paper 7, which related to the Contingencies Fund, the National Assembly approved 13 out of 17 items which accounted for more than $2.1B out of $2.2B.
The Assembly approved the overwhelming majority of the items relating to the use of the Contingencies Fund, and Dr. Singh believes that the result puts to rest the arguments that have historically being made about the appropriateness of the Government’s resort to the Contingencies Fund.
“…we believe that the approval of Financial Paper 8 and the approval of the majority of items under Financial Paper 7 and the associated approval of the related Supplementary Appropriation Bill represent, together, a step forward,”  Dr. Singh posited.
He said there is sufficient cause for concern that the opposition did not see it fit to vote on the items before the House based on their merits, which have clear developmental objectives that the projects serve.
He expressed the view that with the current political configuration of the Parliament, the opposition would have seen the benefits and advantages of taking an objective position and voting on issues based on merits and supporting development. “That was not forthcoming,” the minister declared.
However, he reiterated that the Government will not let progress be stymied, or the task of development be slowed in any way and will not be diverted from an objective of advancing economic growth and social development in Guyana.
In addition, Government repeated its call to the opposition to join in support of such effort and desist from the temptation of wielding the power of the majority of one solely for the purposes of demonstrating political might.
APNU and AFC currently holds a combined one-seat majority in the House, even though the governing PPP/C has the single largest bloc of seats in the National Assembly, as well as the highest number of votes at the last election.
Dr. Singh said such behaviour is not consistent with an opposition committed to development in the country.
According to the Finance Minister, the consideration of financial papers was a very routine matter and should not have attracted any level of disagreement in the National Assembly; hence resulting in the outcome that emerged from that sitting of the Assembly.
During the course of consideration of the two financial papers, members of the Parliamentary opposition made several attempts to frustrate the consideration of the two papers by advancing what Dr. Singh described as “frivolous and baseless arguments”.
Very straightforward items in Financial Paper 7 were questioned and, in a few isolated instances, opposed without any reason grounded in objectivity and rationality, he contended.
This, Dr. Singh said, led one to the inevitable conclusion that this was the “flexing of political muscle and power for the sake of demonstrating what the majority of one could do in the Parliament”.
He recalled that frivolous and baseless attempts were also made to frustrate the Assembly throughout the consideration of Financial Paper number 8.
In response to the efforts by the opposition, he said the Government articulated clear arguments demonstrating that the representations made by the opposition were not grounded in reason, should not be accommodated under the Standing Orders which governs the operations of the parliament and should therefore not be entertained.
However, the Acting Speaker, Ms. Deborah Backer, during the previous sitting of the House, having listened to the arguments put forward by both sides, chose to bring the sitting to a close to seek advice, herself, on the matter.
Prime Minister Samuel Hinds subsequently sent a detailed letter to the Speaker, making reference to relevant Statues and Laws, Standing Orders from comparable jurisdiction and reference to Parliamentary customary practice.
In relation to Financial Paper number 7, the Speaker found that the Government could return for reconsideration of the items that did not receive the benefit of a favourable vote for the said financial paper.
Dr. Singh deems such ruling as “a significant one” and indicated his intention to resubmit the items to Parliament for reconsideration.