THE consideration of the estimates for the 2014 National Budget began over two hours late on Wednesday due to a series of events regarding the Parliamentary Opposition’s right and efforts to cut the estimates.

A meeting held in Speaker Raphael Trotman’s chambers addressed a letter from the Attorney General Anil Nandlall which addressed a motion tabled by A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) Member of Parliament

Carl Greenidge and seconded by Alliance for Change Leader Khemraj Ramjattan.

The motion which was submitted to the Speaker on Tuesday, sought to address the format in which the estimates were presented. It also called on Finance Minister, Dr Ashni Singh to withdraw the estimates of the 2014 National Budget so that changes can be made.

AG Nandlall in the letter requested that the Speaker deem the Motion inadmissible and accordingly, restrain its tabling. He reminded the Speaker in the letter that Article 218 of the Constitution reads, “The Minister responsible for Finance or any other Minister designated by the President shall cause to be prepared and laid before the National Assembly before or within ninety days after the commencement of each financial year, estimates of the revenues and expenditure of Guyana for that year.”

The AG further pointed out that thus it was the exclusive responsibility of the Minister of Finance to prepare and present the National Estimate of Revenues and Expenditure on or before March 31.

“I submit that the Motion is, ipso facto, violative of the Constitution, in as much as, it seeks to direct the Minister in respect of how estimates are to be prepared; but more fundamentally, it seeks to cause the Minister to embark upon a course of action which will, ineluctably, collide with Article 218of the Constitution by requesting, at this late hour, that the Minister withdraw and re-submit the estimates, the re-submission of which will manifestly be outside of the constitutionally mandated time-frame of ninety days from the beginning of the financial year. That the Motion itself was delivered to the Clerk of the National Assembly after the expiration of that ninety days period is axiomatic,” the AG pointed out in the letter.

He further suggested that the Motion therefore, “is not only ipso facto unconstitutional but if deemed admissible and passed, would inexorably catalyse the majority in the National Assembly to act in a manner which is violative and ultra vires of the letter and spirit of Article 218 of the Constitution. That the relief which it seeks is a course of action that is patently in breach of the Constitution.”

AG Nandlall also reminded that several members of the Judiciary in recent times have indicated that the National Assembly cannot act contrary to and in abrogation of the Constitution of Guyana.
“I believe that we have matured beyond the thinking that the National Assembly can act contrary to and in abrogation of the Constitution of Guyana. That we have several rulings in recent times from the Judiciary reinforcing this jurisprudential fact, is a matter of public notoriety,” AG Nandlall sstated.

“In the circumstances, I respectfully request that you deem this Motion inadmissible and accordingly, restrain its tabling. It is with profound regret that I inform you that if my request is not heeded, another bout of litigation shall be the consequence,” he added.

“I solicit your most magnanimous judgment in this matter,” Nandlall concluded.
The Speaker subsequently reported that a course of action was agreed to during the meeting, which saw Greenidge and Minister Singh both making statements to the House indicating that the Motion could be withdrawn.