Dear Editor,
The current “parliamentary saga” between the Speaker of the National Assembly and the Finance Minister, and by extension the government and the People’s Progressive Party Civic must remind Guyanese of the “backyardish, retarded, exclusive politics” the PPP/C is committed to.
Let’s not get the issues confused but understand that the basis for the Finance Minister, Dr Ashni Singh, to challenge the PPP/C appointed Speaker, Ralph Ramkarran, is because the Speaker approved a motion brought by PNCR Member of Parliamentarian Mr. Winston Murray. Since the PPP/C runs the government with a “we time mentality“, therefore, it is given that the Speaker must not entertain any motion brought by the opposition, especially if such motion seeks to question the exercise of executive discretion. This line of attack by the “rookie MP”, and the government’s Spokesman, Roger Luncheon, is an attempt to remind the Speaker that he must not shy away from that most fundamental principle of the party and government, a principle grounded in exclusivity and obsession with power.
No interest is given to the content of the motion and how it may help towards promoting greater democratic values in government, no thought is given to the fact that the Standing Orders might be compromised if Ramkarran had allowed Singh to disrespect the office of the Speaker. These matters are clearly not considered. Dr Roger Luncheon denigrated the Speaker’s action and questioned his ability to interpret the rules of the parliament, as he deemed Ramkarran’s reasoning and ruling as being “fundamentally flawed”.
These open repressive acts on the part of the government and its ministers seek to solidify the “we time mentality principle”, clearly no consideration is given to the citizens who deserve a respectful and responsible government.
Again, Ramkarran was reminded that he is attempting to step outside of the thinking parameters of the party and his role of Speaker is subject to the party’s beliefs.
He is also reminded that the government does not subscribe to the constitutionally ingrained doctrine of “separation of powers”, so he must perform his duty with the belief that the Parliament is just another aspect of the executive government, like they perceive the Judiciary to be.
Yours faithfully,
Lurlene Nestor
