PRESIDENTIAL Advisor on Governance Ms. Gail Teixeira said the combined Opposition’s one-seat majority in Parliament is a “political myth” that is being utilised by the A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and the Alliance For Change (AFC).

Ms. Teixeira, who is also Government’s Chief Whip in the National Assembly, expressed these sentiments during a recent broadcast of ‘Political Scope’ on the National Communications Network (NCN).
“The one seat majority is fragile…it is actually a political myth,” she declared.
Teixeira acknowledged that together, APNU with 26 seats in the House and AFC with seven seats, the political Opposition have used their combined 33 seats well, given that the ruling People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) holds the majority 32 seats.
“Admittedly, they have exercised it (their combined advantage) effectively in the Parliament, but not effectively for the country,” she said.
The Presidential Advisor declared that all efforts to work with the combined Opposition have failed.
“These are some of the many issues where Guyana could have come first…it is an all or nothing position (with the Opposition)….this cannot be the behaviour of wise, rational leadership,” Teixeira posited.

COMPROMISES PROPOSED
She cited some of these areas where compromise was proposed, including as it relates to the passage of the Anti-Money Laundering and the Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) (Amendment) Bill.
Ahead of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) June plenary in Paris, France, APNU had proposed three amendments, which were included in the Party’s draft amendments to the Principal AML/CFT Act.
President Donald Ramotar had indicated that APNU’s demands would be supported, if APNU agreed to making future amendments, was the Bill found to be in breach of international AML/CFT standards. This was rejected.
APNU’s position was an ‘all-or-nothing’ one, as the Party then stressed that it wanted its three amendments to be included in the AML/CFT Bill, as well as other demands.
These included that the President give his assent to several Bills passed in the National Assembly, including the Local Authorities (Elections) (Amendment) Bill 2013, which states that elections must be held on or before August 1, 2014. The Head of State has already forwarded his explanation for his non-assent to the National Assembly.
As a result, the critically important Bill continues to languish before the Parliamentary Special Select Committee that is reviewing it.

UNREASONABLE DEMANDS
Another example of the ‘all or nothing stance’ was underscored by AFC’s demand for the establishment of the Public Procurement Commission (PPC), which the government has agreed to, providing that Cabinet retain its no-objection role in the process; but the latter position has been rejected by the AFC.
The Procurement (Amendment) Bill 2013 was read a first time in the National Assembly last November and aims to amend the 2003 principal Procurement Act by making changes to section 54, deleting subsection six – effectively restoring Cabinet’s no-objection role.
Section 54 deals with Cabinet’s involvement in reviewing the award of procurement contracts and the phasing out of its functions with the establishment of a Public Procurement Commission, in the interest of de-centralising the procurement process.
Subsection six states that: “Cabinet’s involvement shall cease upon the establishment of the Public Procurement Commission, except in relation to those matters referred to in subsection one which are pending.”
Without the Procurement (Amendment) Bill 2013, once the PPC is established, Cabinet’s no-objection role will no longer be effective.
While there have been moves at the level of the Public Accounts Committee to address the establishment of the PPC, the PPC cannot be set up without a two-thirds majority support in the National Assembly.
The Government’s consistent argument has been that if a Government is charged with accounting for the nation’s finances, it should have, at least, a no-objection to the award of contracts.

FAILED EFFORTS
According to the Presidential Advisor, there were several other areas where attempts at compromise, in the interest of the Guyanese people, failed.
“When has there been a compromise? It is the Opposition that is behaving, in the Opposition, like dictators,” she stressed.
The fact that the political Opposition took such strong positions over the last three years is something that will undoubtedly shadow their future endeavours.
She said, “Clearly it is almost as if they are casting shadows and the shadow is on them…particularly considering the history they come out of. I say to the people, do not take lightly the actions of the Opposition in the Parliament, because they are casting their shadow as to what could happen were they, if they were, to ever get into Government. If they are taking such anti-national and dictatorial positions outside of Government, one wonders what would happen were they to get into Government.”
Teixeira expressed confidence in the Guyanese people’s ability to assess the current state of affairs for themselves. “I believe that if people sit down in their quite time, they will realise,” she concluded.