Service Commissions to be treated as autonomous
AN opposition motion to treat the Judicial Service Commission, the Public Service Commission, the Police Service Commission and the Teaching Service Commission as autonomous bodies drawing directly from the Consolidated Fund, was carried last evening in the House. Amendments to the motion by the government side, including that the House refer this matter to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Constitutional Reform, were defeated by the combined opposition.
Another amendment proposed was to add: “Whereas during the April Budget 2012, talks between the Government of Guyana and the Leader of the Opposition and the APNU, agreement was reached that certain entities not included under Schedule III of the Article 222A of the Constitution including the Service Commissions, would require constitutional reform.
The motion passed on the Service Commissions was moved by APNU Member of Parliament and Shadow Finance Minister Carl Greenidge, and says that the National Assembly take steps as early as possible to replace the schedule with one that does not list the Judicial Service Commission, the Public Service Commission, the Police Service Commission and the Teaching Service Commission as budget agencies; and the National Assembly henceforth treat the Commissions as autonomous bodies drawing directly from the Consolidated Fund, and that this change must be reflected in the Annual Estimates to be submitted by the Minister of Finance for the approval of the National Assembly.
Greenidge said that APNU has not arrived at any agreement with the PPP on the treatment of the issue of Service Commissions, hence, the motion.
“I think it would be stretching logic to the extreme to argue that the Constitution does not require them to be independent or autonomous,” he said.
He said there is nothing preventing the government from treating them as autonomous and in fact, “it is imperative that they be treated as autonomous”.
He asked the House to look at the motion which asked that the National Assembly  take steps as early as possible to replace the schedule with one that does not list these service agencies as budget agencies covered by the actions of the Ministry of Finance.
Continuing, “…in the way that they are constrained under the Act, but instead to allow them, as with the other properly constitution entities, to receive their funding directly from the Consolidated Fund”.
He said they are also proposing that the commissions be treated as autonomous agencies drawing directly from the Consolidated Fund, and that these changes be reflected in the annual estimates to be submitted by the Minister of Finance for approval of the National Assembly on the next occasion, on which he presents such estimates.
Opposition Leader David Granger and fellow APNU MP, Dr. Rupert Roopnarine, also lent support to the motion.
Also, Alliance For Change (AFC) MP Khemraj Ramjattan said, “I, on behalf of the AFC, indicate that, as stated in the motion, there is tremendous support for it and there is no need then to delay the process”.
Prime Minister and Leader of the House, Samuel Hinds, who submitted the amendments to the motion, in responding, said, “We on this side in the government do not contest that these four commissions are to be able to operate independently of any direction”.
He said they hold that the issue of their independence is addressed and spoken to in the Constitution in Article 222A and hold that this is the one that guides their action.
Prime Minister Hinds said there is nothing being done now that is in violation of the Constitution or any other law.
He pointed to the recommendations calling on the Constitutional Reform Committee to consider this matter and make the appropriate recommendation to the National Assembly, and “I have no doubt such recommendations would receive the kind of support that such constitutional amendments would require.
“So we have our final (recommendation) Be It Resolved that this House refers this matter to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Constitutional Reform and we propose that the other Be It Resolved and Be It Further Resolved Clauses be deleted,” he outlined.
“We recognised a need for reform here and we intend to support the reform and we hope that our proposed amendments would find favour with the House,” he expressed.
People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Chief Whip, Gail Teixeira, said, “As you can see from Prime Minister’s amendment to the motion, that we take seriously the discussions that are held at the inter-parliamentary political party dialogue”.
She noted that one of the issues raised by the Opposition included the constitutional bodies including the Service Commissions, and the government had stated at the discussion with the opposition that these matters require constitutional amendments and would therefore require consensus in the House, and offered that these matters should go to the Parliamentary Constitutional Reform Committee.
The PPP/C MP insisted that this motion attempts to deal with an issue that is a constitutional matter.