IT was the author Frank Sonnenberg who famously said that “…you don’t win a debate by suppressing discussion; you win it with a better argument.”

He went on to say that “…free speech and debate are essential in our search for the truth.”

Sonnenberg’s statements are true and should be practised by all right-thinking Guyanese, especially the politicians and parliamentarians who are representing the people at the highest legislative assembly in the country.

Last week, such an opportunity presented itself when the debate on the National Budget, which stands at $781.9 billion, came around in the National Assembly.

Each parliamentarian had an opportunity to debate the planned budget and give a political, factual and realistic opinion on the PPP/C’s plans as well as policies for the development of Guyana’s economy.

They had a copy of the budget and no less than six days to prepare their debates. Some even had more than ten days to prepare their speeches and debate. The staff at the Parliamentary Office were on hand, and willing to help any Parliamentarian with research, information, and other forms of data once it fell within their portfolios.

One would expect these Parliamentarians to be politically crafty with how they planned to debate the budget. One would even expect the use of props and other forms of illustrations to be used in their presentations.

In any event, Guyanese expected the use of skillful argumentation and persuasiveness but above all the truth would be present. As a matter of fact, the truth was essential and critical to this year’s budget debates as it is to every other debate and public life.

Sadly, Guyanese were short-changed by members of the National Assembly, more so the APNU+AFC Opposition.

Firstly, it was disappointing and underwhelming generally, except for a few presentations which were commendable from start to finish, having all the right elements of well-thought-out, factual and passionate debate.

These were the high points of the week-long debate politics aside. Education Minister, Priya Manickchand was arguably the standout Parliamentarian who vigorously defended the government allocations in the education sector. She was political but at the same time used facts and data to make her case. The minister’s presentation was masterful and very balanced.

Other government parliamentarians who also went full-beast mode into the debate this year were Senior Minister in the office of the President with responsibility for Finance, Dr Ashni Singh; Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister, Anil Nandlall; Parliamentary and Governance Minister, Gail Teixeira; Public Works Minister, Bishop Juan Edghill; Labour Minister, Joseph Hamilton; Minister within the Ministry of Housing and Water, Susan Rodrigues, and the Minister within the Office of the Prime Minister with responsibility for Public Affairs, Kwame Mc Coy.

The Opposition Parliamentarians who delivered passionate and nail-biting debates, though they were not factual or bedded in realism, were Amanza Desir, Shurwayne Holder, Christopher Jones, Volda Lawrence, Catherine Hughes, Ganesh Mahipaul, Vinceroy Jordan, Annette Ferguson, and Aubrey Norton.

Secondly, the fact that the Speaker of the National Assembly Manzoor Nadir had to upbraid several Parliamentarians for using terms that he deemed “unparliamentary”, was alarming and telling of the type of behaviour that took place.

Mostly, the opposition APNU+AFC must school its Parliamentarians about the rules governing their conduct in the House during a debate.

After all, being loud and boisterous is not debating nor is twisting facts debating. Telling lies and inventing stories, which all took place during the debates, is not cute or something to smile about.

Ordinary men and women in the public are not benefitting from this gamble.

The truth is, the opposition Parliamentarians disappointed Guyanese when they were telling lie after lie in an attempt to justify their non-support of the budget brought by the PPP/C Government.

There was a gamut of bread-and-butter issues which the people of this country have that the PPP is slowly or not addressing in a satisfactory manner.

These were not even brought into the debates by the opposition but instead, there was an attempt to exaggerate the cost-of-living issue.

Also, an attempt was made to beat down the PPP/C Government about corruption and lack of transparency, not taking into account the very same government is building back confidence in the economy which the APNU+AFC destroyed during its time in office.

Truthfully, as well, the PPP/C Government is addressing issues related to corruption, transparency and accountability every day that goes by.

Finally, Sonnenberg’s words are a lesson to the Parliamentarians and all the debaters in public life. When the next budget cycle comes around, it is hoped that Parliamentarians will hone in on every sector making recommendations and policy proposals about things that Guyanese people actually care about, and want.

The Opposition must meet the PPP/C Government at the table at the time of budget planning to make proposals that are going to make lives easier not cry about not being consulted after.