-ignores civil society concerns
Ignoring mounting calls from civil society and an in-House protest from the Opposition to send the controversial Natural Resource Fund Bill to a Special Select Committee for debate and consultations, the PPP/C last night blazed ahead with the passage of the controversial legislation.
Boisterous chants from the opposition APNU+AFC members, whistles, and even an attempt to grab the Speaker’s Mace did not deter Minister of Finance Dr Ashni Singh from forging ahead with the second and third readings of the Bill to allow for its passage after some order had been restored.
At around 7 pm, the Arthur Chung Conference Centre descended into chaos and bedlam after Singh rose to request that the PPP/C’s proposed law be read for a second time.
The debate was scheduled to commence following the passage of the Local Content Bill but as the House resumed its sitting, Opposition Chief Whip, Christopher Jones, rose to request that the Speaker of the House Manzoor Nadir refer the bill to the Committee.
“Comrade Speaker, at this late hour, as it relates to this Natural Resources Fund Bill, it has come in for sharp criticisms from political parties, churches… etcetera, essentially calling for the government to delay the passage of this bill, so as to allow wide consultation so that all of the Guyanese society could have the opportunity to contribute to this Bill. Comrade Speaker I believe that this bill is beyond us in this House, it speaks about the future of generations,” Jones said before being interrupted by the Speaker.
Speaker Nadir responded, “I hear your comment. Your members would have ample opportunity to continue to make that plea but as the Standing Orders go I must now call on the Honourable Minister to move that the bill be read a second time.”
At that point, Jones and his colleagues stood in objection. “We stand in objection. No! No! No!! It must not be read!” were chants that came thundering through as Singh rose a second time.
The Speaker again called on Jones, saying that he had counted eighteen persons interrupting and made it clear that he was “not in favour of your [Jones’] move for this Bill to be sent to a Select Committee until I hear this debate.” He requested that Jones ask them to take their seats or “I will have to start calling on members.”
They did not stop.
“Honourable Member Mr Jones, Honourable members of the Opposition, I am on my feet. I am on my feet!” Nadir said, asking APNU+AFC Parliamentarian Sherod Duncan and other members to put down their placards.
However, the opposition ignored the pleas of the Speaker and began using water bottles, sanitiser bottles, and other objects to bang on the table, shouting “No, no thieving bill must pass!”
After the continuous banging on the desk by Opposition Members, Nadir called on Jones, Duncan, Tabitha Sarabo-Halley, Ronald Cox, Ganesh Mahipaul, and Annette Ferguson, to withdraw from the Assembly before handing the floor to Singh to present the bill.
“Mr Speaker, I rise to speak in support of the NRF 2021. A Bill, Sir, that comprises the second installment of a two-part set of legislation aimed at improving significantly the governance of Guyana’s new and emerging sector,” Singh declared through the protest.
This led to Jones leading his colleagues to centre stage where they increased their volume and whipped out whistles in an attempt at drowning out a resolute Singh who raised his voice louder as the noise continued.
The Speaker took a short break and when the sitting resumed, the protest began anew with Opposition Members encircling Singh, whose colleagues then moved to his side to form a barrier, while the Opposition persisted with the blowing of whistles and chanting.
Singh, who appeared not to be fazed, spoke on the history of the APNU+AFC’s NRF legislation which he emphasised was passed at a time when “instead of respecting the NCM [no-confidence motion] and constitution the AFC insisted on defying it, remained illegally and came back to parliament on the 3rd of January, 2019, and forced through the Parliament (the) Natural Resources Act. Sir, that NRF is one of the most vulgar [pieces of legislation],” he posited.
His presentation was interrupted by a scream of “Oh mi God!” from a female and all attention turned to the Speaker’s desk where the Mace lay and a tussle was ensuing between APNU+AFC MP Annette Ferguson and staff of the Parliament as she sought to grab it.
She would walk away muttering while parliamentary staff continued to barricade the Speaker who asked that Singh continue.
The Minister repeated much of what government had stated about the bill; that it replaces an Act that did not have a governance structure and gave sole powers to the Minister for their personal oversight.
“The Act vested all executive power and authority in a single individual: the Minister of Finance,” he stressed.
He continued defending the new Bill, saying that it brings structure not concentrated to one individual and one which offers transparency in spending.
Singh noted that while everyone has criticised how his government intends to use the funds, “Not a single commentator” has been able to say how much would have been designated for spending under the APNU+AFC law. He reasoned that even if they tried they could not because it was a “mystery… mumbo jumbo… and dictatorial.”
Completing his defence of the Bill as his colleagues tightened their protective barricade around him while the Speaker held the Mace firmly on his thighs below his desk, Singh asked that the Bill be accepted and read for the second time.
This was granted by the Speaker who directed Clerk of the National Assembly, Sherlock Isaacs, to proceed with the second reading and he then resolved the House into Committee so that its 47 clauses and two schedules that formed it could be examined before putting the question of acceptance to the floor.
The Opposition objected from their close-to-the-door vantage point and when the Speaker concluded, they all left Parliament.
Growing apprehension over the new Bill that was gazetted eight days before its scheduled debate saw three civil society groups on Monday calling on the government to postpone parliamentary debate on it.
The Trades Union Congress, Transparency Institute of Guyana Inc, and Article 13 – the civil society group formed to promote inclusionary and participatory governance – called on Ali and the Government of Guyana to delay yesterday’s scheduled parliamentary vote on the bill. The groups noted that this Bill was gazetted on December 15, 2021, and read for the first time in the National Assembly the following day.
Earlier, a petition had been lodged with Parliament by Policy Forum Guyana with the signatures of 64 Guyanese calling for a deferral of debate on the Natural Resources Fund Bill until citizens could consider it.
Yesterday, the Georgetown Chamber of Commerce and Industry added its voice to the calls for a postponement so that consultations could be had.
Government’s adamant stance in bringing into law, governance of this country’s oil funds without ample consultations goes against the advice of a former manager of one of the world’s most successful Sovereign Wealth Funds, Eric Parrado, who had delivered the same message to APNU+AFC when he had stressed the importance of full consensus by the society on its fiscal and legislative framework.
“If you pass the law, you can say ‘we are going to ring-fence the resources for the Guyanese people’ and we need that process now. We need to reach the consensus with the full society, then we need to pass the law—hopefully before 2020 because the revenues are coming in 2020, the temptation could be high and because you have an elections,” Parrado had said back in 2018.
The International Finance Coordinator at Chile’s Ministry of Finance, who helped build that country’s SWF, and who is now Economist and General Manager of the Research Department of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), had been part of a seven-member group of international researchers and petroleum policy advisors that met with David Granger APNU+AFC’s Cabinet ministers. The team had discussed the emerging oil & gas sector and gave insights into prudent preparations for the revenues that will be generated from the industry.
He had explained that there was a role for every citizen of Guyana in the process but noted that the SWF’s framework and processes have to “be in the law but it has to be flexible enough.”
President Irfaan Ali on Tuesday mounted an impassioned defence of the Bill for the governing of oil money and said that the Bill was not crafted in isolation as it encompasses transparent spending and investment to ensure holistic plans for development. And according to the President, the old Act has to be repealed because it was “severely deficient” as it had no governing body as is required by the internationally endorsed transparency and good governance rules in the Santiago Principles.
However, neither he nor any of the parliamentarians yesterday have explained who is selecting members of the Board of Directors, a major concern of critics of the legislation, along with the proposed rate of extraction of monies.
He had also stayed clear of addressing concerns that yesterday’s deadline was too short a period before Bill was debated.
Instead, Ali justified his government’s actions saying the Bill delivers on campaign promises made in his party’s manifesto.
