The Tax (Amendment) Bill 2016 was passed by acclamation last night even though the number of MPs on both sides of the House was equal.
Had a division been called for by the opposition, where each vote would have had to be registered, the bill would have failed as it required a majority. The failure would have been a major embarrassment to the government, which is nursing a slender one-seat majority. The bill pertains to tax measures announced in this year’s budget.
After the bill had been declared passed by the Speaker, there was an uproar as People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Chief Whip Gail Teixeira stated that the bill had been declared passed even though there were 32 votes on each side as Minister of Education, Dr Rupert Roopnaraine was not present at the point at which the question was put.
After the bill had been declared passed and Speaker Barton Scotland moved on to other business, Teixeira rose and said, “Sir, I need your help. When we took the vote just now there were 32 on this side and 32 on that side and therefore the bill was not carried. The bill was not passed because the vote between the two were equal.”
Leader of the Opposition Bharrat Jagdeo also stood up to address the matter. “In such a situation a vote was put, there was a yay and a nay. In the determination of the yay and the nay the Speaker had to make a judgment,” he said, stating that while a judgement was made there were equal numbers on both sides. “… How could that judgement in this case be in favour of the government? If it was brought to our attention belated that the numbers on that side are equal to the numbers on our side, …it means that a vote which was equal, equally acknowledged on both sides has been ruled by the Speaker in favour of the government and I don’t know if we are in uncharted territories, we are in charted territories,” he added.
In reply, the Speaker said, “There was an opportunity to do then what we are doing now, all of us. It is not a question of voting in favour of the government, as we put it, it is a question of making a determination at the time it was made in one way or the other that is what happened,” Scotland said, adding that both sides of the House had the opportunity at the time to call for a division. “It seems to me somewhat convenient that at the end the declaration of something is then brought to the Speaker,” he added, stating that it was not convenient play but only fair play.
