Dear Editor,
Convening of the 10th Parliament happened on Thursday, January 12. I observed at the Parliament on that day that the House proceeded to institute the elections process for the Speaker and Deputy Speaker before Members of Parliament (MPs) were sworn in. I thought then that that was odd, because MPs were voting prior to their becoming legally constituted. Nonetheless, there may have been good reasons and existing parliamentary rules for this modus operandi.
At any rate, the most important business of that event was the election of the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of the House. Both were elected through a simple majority of members present and voting in the House, where the elected Speaker and Deputy Speaker came from the combined opposition. While this action may not be erroneous from a majority-minority perspective, it seems to be inconsistent with what prevails in several parliamentary democracies, namely, that the Speaker generally comes from the ruling party. Here is a list of Speakers in some of those democracies:
India: Smt Meira Kumar (ruling Congress Party, main coalition partner) is the Speaker of the House in the Lok Sabha.
Singapore: Mr Michael Palmer (ruling People’s Action Party) is the Speaker of the Singapore Parliament.
Great Britain Mr John Bercow (ruling Conservative Party, main coalition partner), is the Speaker of the House of Commons.
Canada: Mr Andrew Scheer (ruling Conservative Party of Canada), is the Speaker of the House of Commons.
New Zealand: Dr Lockwood Smith (ruling National Party), is the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Trinidad & Tobago: Mr Wade Mark (ruling UNC, main coalition partner) is the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Barbados: Mr Michael Carrington (ruling Democratic Labor Party) is the Speaker of the House of Assembly.
St Lucia: Mr Peter Foster (ruling St Lucia Labour Party) is the Speaker of the House.
In India’s parliamentary democracy, the following holds: “One of the first acts of a newly constituted House is to elect the Speaker. Usually, a member belonging to the ruling party is elected the Speaker. A healthy convention, however, has evolved over the years whereby the ruling party nominates its candidate after informal consultations with the Leaders of other Parties and Groups in the House. This convention ensures that once elected, the Speaker enjoys the respect of all sections of the House” (Office of the Speaker Lok Sabha).
Nevertheless, there is the view of some in Guyana that a simple majority of the MPs to elect the Speaker and Deputy Speaker minus informal inter-party consultations could supersede the parliamentary convention, that the Speaker generally should emanate from the ruling party.
The raison d’être for this convention is to create an environment where the elected Speaker would command full authority within parliamentary chambers. I am not sure that in the first meeting of the 10th Parliament, in a situation of total partisan voting possibly producing an erosion of trust and confidence in that parliamentary environment, whether the elected Speaker and Deputy Speaker can effectively function.
In the current state of affairs, the totally partisan voting to elect the Speaker and Deputy Speaker is not a ‘coming together,’ for the voting behaviour exposes the non-resolution of several challenges to ‘coming together.’ Based on Professor Spear’s work, here is one challenge: When parliament or a similar-type body endorses a measure, a party leader may experience a sense of betrayal as a result of competing interests among all the parties; also, a party leader may feel shortchanged in relation to the endorsement itself. Here is a second challenge: in a devious situation, party leaders may attempt to damage political competitors.
This partisan voting for such high offices did little to create trust and inclusiveness in an effort to address these challenges to ‘coming together’ in a spirit of cooperation and unity. And the combined opposition’s call to have a greater role in the forthcoming national budgetary formulations is a further demonstration of no attempt to address challenges impinging on coming together, because in any coming together, a pre-condition has to be that party leaders acknowledge their political status and role within the formal structure, then negotiations proceed.
Any such non-acknowledgement and non-acceptance may motivate people toward attempting to appropriate other people’s status and role; this is not the way to achieve interdependence vis-à-vis negotiations. This behaviour does not bode well for coming together and creating inclusiveness. The government has executive responsibilities, and the combined opposition’s legislative power lies within the National Assembly. Useful negotiations for coming together would only unfold when, for starters, there is that acknowledgement of the prevailing status quo, and addressing the challenges for coming together.
Yours faithfully,
Prem Misir
