Local Government Minister Ganga Persaud says that the basis for the no-confidence motion moved by members of the Region 8 Regional Democratic Council (RDC) against its Regional Execu-tive Officer (REO) was inconsistent with the mandate of the council and therefore did not lead to the removal of the officer.
Ganga’s answer was in a written response in Parliament yesterday to a question posed by A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) MP and Shadow Minister of Local Government Ronald Bulkan. Bulkan had asked Persaud to inform the National Assembly of the actions taken, if any, in relation to the No-Confidence Motion that was passed against Ronald Harsawack.
Last July, a no confidence motion was brought by the APNU and passed by a majority of the members of the Potaro/Siparuni RDC against the REO. Stabroek News had reported that eight of the 15 members of the RDC backed the motion, which was based on a series of complaints against the REO.
Explaining the rationale behind the move, Mark Crawford, the Region’s Chairman had said that “the council’s decision to move the motion of no-confidence against the REO was based solely on the failure of the REO to cooperate with the council.”
In the written response yesterday, Persaud said that an analysis for the no-confidence motion found it to be inconsistent with the mandate of the council. He said that in light of the finding, “discussions were held with the Regional Chairman both individually and collectively.” No further information was provided by Persaud.
Questions were also asked about the protocol relating to an appointed regional official committing the Local Government Ministry for the provision of goods and services, and more specifically, if Harsawack was empowered to commit the region in the absence of the RDC.
In response Persaud referred Bulkan to the National Procurement Act, which he said contained all the information being requested by the Shadow Minister. The Minister added that the roles of the RDC were also defined by statute, and said that because Bulkan failed to identify a particular incident/activity, he was unable to give a specific answer to the question.
Further, Persaud said “the REO and the Chairman of the Regional Tender Board (are) responsible for the procurement of goods and services required for the Administration of the Region. The REO as the accounting officer does not need explicit approval of the Council for each and every act of Procurement of Goods and Services by the Administration.”
Bulkan also wrote to the Minister inquiring about details and the status of the “Communities Services Enhancement Project,” initiated by the Government of Guyana and the Ministry of Local Government in 2006, which was aimed at upgrading Bartica, Charity, Parika and Supenaam to municipalities. Bulkan also asked if any additional communities had been added to the list of intended municipalities since 2006.
Persaud, who stated that the project had already concluded, said that the preparation process for “Township” status was ongoing in each of the communities initially listed as the project’s targets. He added that suggestions and proposals for similar initiatives to be undertaken with other communities have been made, but said that the administration “has continued to evaluate those suggestions and proposals.” Ultimately the minister directed Bulkan’s question on this matter to the Central Housing and Planning Authority, saying that the body “is responsible for Town and County Planning and is the better entity to make decisions about this matter.”
