The opposition People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) is once again accusing House Speaker Dr Barton Scotland of partisanship, which it says prompted a walkout by its parliamentarians during a debate in the wee hours of yesterday morning.
The walkout followed a request from the Speaker, for PPP/C Member of Parliament Anil Nandlall to leave the House after he refused to withdraw a statement he could not immediately substantiate.
Nandlall, however, yesterday said Scotland is violating the doctrine of fairness and impartiality, by which he is bound.
“Parliament is the highest discussion forum in our constitutional democracy. It is the place where the peoples’ representative represent their interest by speaking [in] a process encouraged and facilitated by an impartial Speaker, not frustrated and curtailed,” Nandlall told Stabroek News.
PPP/C members, including Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo, have in the past criticised the Speaker for partisanship while presiding over past debates.
Just after midnight, on Saturday morning, Nandlall, who had been offering his contribution on a debate of President David Granger’s October 13 address to the House, said Minister of Communities Ronald Bulkan had admitted that the firm BK International was paid a sum of US$5.7 million in an out-of-court settlement for works done at the Haags Bosch Sanitary Landfill based solely on a “threatening letter.”
“We learnt through the Minister of Communities that BK sent a threatening letter and he got $5.7 million. The most potent legal letter ever written. I got that from the Honourable Minister. It was reported in the media and I think he even said it in this house as well,” Nandlall argued.
This submission was being used by Nandlall to support his assertion that the speech delivered by President Granger lacked depth and enough of a policy orientation to meet the standard of a speech which warrants debate.
As Nandlall cited the BK settlement to argue that the recent actions of the government lack policy directive, Bulkan rose on a point of order and challenged the accuracy of the statement made.
“The Honourable member is attributing a statement to me that is totally erroneous and I ask that he withdraw it,” Bulkan said.
At this point, Scotland called on Nandlall to support his remarks. In response, Nandlall, supported by other opposition members, declared that the statement was a fact that was publicly repeated on numerous occasions without challenge.
“The minister disclosed publicly that the monies were paid through a threatening letter sent. I’ll repeat that a million times, I’m not going to withdraw that. That was reported in the newspapers. I have the newspapers too because I wrote several articles on it and not once was it refuted. It was reported in the newspapers and the Honourable member never denounced it,” Nandlall said.
Pressed by the Speaker to either substantiate the statement at that moment or withdraw it so that the House could move on, Nandlall requested an hour to go home for the newspaper.
“With the greatest of respect, I want one hour to substantiate it. I am going home now to bring the newspaper. I am asking Your Honour’s leave to go home to bring the newspaper,” he said. His request was denied and the Speaker offered him the option of withdrawing the statement or taking his seat.
“Well, I will take my seat, sir. I’m not going to withdraw it. [Speaking to government members across the aisle] I am not going to withdraw it. I am not withdrawing any statement. You tek me for a lil boy!” Nandlall said.
“Honourable member, you are out of order and for the rest of the evening you will take no further part in this House,” the Speaker said in response.
“I don’t intend to sir,” Nandlall said.
“Then you will leave,” the Speaker added.
“Yes sir, I plan to. I am packing,” Nandlall replied, while fellow parliamentarian Priya Manickchand added, “All of us. All of us will be leaving.”
As the opposition Members of Parliament cleared the House, their Chief Whip Gail Teixeira asked to put on record that the outcome was what was to be expected when a motion was thrown at the opposition with no proper notice.
“We did not anticipate discussing this motion tonight. We had to be speaking with very little preparation, so a lot of things we would’ve been expected to have, we did not,” she said.
Nandlall has since identified the article he was referring to as one published in the Kaieteur News on August 23, under the headline, “Govt pays BK US$5.7m on a simple threat letter.”
The article states that in an interview, Minister Bulkan said “BK International should be compensated after its contract for the management of the Haags Bosch was arbitrarily terminated.” He is also credited with saying, “The company, however, never moved to the court for compensation.” According to the newspaper, he revealed that by way of letter, BK made a claim for over US$10M to the government.
In the absence of the opposition, the government members subsequently approved the motion moved by Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo for the House to express its appreciation to President Granger for his address and to approve the policies and plans he had outlined.
In February, Jagdeo complained that the opposition was being subjected to “extremely partisan behaviour” by the Speaker and declared that the situation was becoming overbearing. “This has to stop. We are not here at the pleasure of the Speaker; we are here in service of the people of this country,” Jagdeo said when the PPP/C staged a walkout after the Speaker refused to allow additional time to be granted for more questions by opposition members during the consideration of the budget estimates.
