Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly Clarissa Riehl says that she will not be intimidated by persons who felt dissatisfied by her ruling on the Berbice Bridge motion debate in Parliament two weeks ago.
Speaking at yesterday’s sitting of the National Assembly, Riehl said that she stands by her decision on January 23 to disallow Prime Minister Sam Hinds’ application to bring the debate on the Berbice Bridge motion to a close.
Hinds sought to invoke Standing Order 39 Paragraph 2, which states “A Minister may conclude a debate on any motion that is critical of the Government or reflects adversely on or is calculated to bring discredit to the Government or a Government Officer.”
Riehl in her remarks to the National Assembly said yesterday that the motion being debated at the time of the ruling did not qualify under Paragraph 2 of Standing Order 39. She said that none of the motion’s ‘whereas’ or ‘resolve’ clauses was critical of the Government.
She said that her ruling on the motion should have been the end of the matter, but she noted that the debate continued even on television and that the PPP released a statement expressing deep concern over her ruling. She said that she has found no precedents that would put a different interpretation on Paragraph 2 of Standing Order 39 and that until such time her ruling stands.
She said that Members of Parliament calling her character or actions into question can be considered as contemptuous given the authority vested in her office. Riehl, a PNCR-1G MP, has been filling in for Speaker of the National Assembly Ralph Ramkarran who is away for medical reasons.
The Bridge motion, which was eventually defeated in the National Assembly, was grounded in an assessment undertaken by Patricio Millan Development Consultants Inc of the feasibility study that The Louis Berger Group completed.
The plans for the bridge have been based on the Louis Berger feasibility study, which the Patricio Millan review found to have grossly under-estimated costs for construction and maintenance.
PNCR-1G MP James McAllister’s motion sought to have the National Assembly rule that construction of the bridge be halted for three months until the Economic Services Committee (ESC) of Parliament reviewed the findings of the Millan report.
The PPP/C contended in their release that the Deputy Speaker’s ruling was a breach of Standing Order 39 “Right of Reply” clauses 1 and 2.
