Budget debate adjourned briefly as tempers flare

Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly Clarissa Riehl briefly suspended the budget debate session late last night after a ruckus broke out over a comment the President reportedly made about the Norwegian forest deal and its impact on mining.

Leslie Ramsammy

PNCR-1G MP Judith David-Blair triggered an intense row in the House when she offered up her interpretation of what President Bharrat Jagdeo had said to miners during a meeting to discuss the Norwegian deal. David-Blair, who was on the floor at the time, commented that the President spoke of the deal as a priority over sustaining small-scale mining in the country.

The brief adjournment ended a bitter row which erupted in the Assembly between the PPP/C MPs and the parliamentarians on PNCR-1G benches. The argument escalated into a verbal brawl led by PPP/C MPs Clement Rohee and Dr Leslie Ramsammy and on the opposition side, MPs Winston Murray and Aubrey Norton.

The exchanges were sharp as they traded words over who was wrong and who was out of

Clarissa Riehl

order. The government benches argued that David-Blair was out of line to criticize the President saying they would not sit and allow it.

“Not here! No! No! She is not allowed to do it here!” MP Clement Rohee shouted as he argued intensely with Murray.

Murray questioned why his colleague could not raise her points and passionately enquired whether Rohee was “a dictator”.

Ramsammy joined the fracas saying the PNCR could take its “show” outside on the streets and spare the Assembly. He said the House was not the place for the “things” they wanted to “carry on with” and objected strongly. At this time, the Deputy Speaker was on her feet but the verbal war continued and within seconds the call was made to adjourn the session.

The Deputy Speaker was not yet out of the room and disagreement had erupted into a full-blown argument. Murray boldly declared that no one on the opposition benches was afraid of the government ministers and he held firm to his position that David-Blair was not out of line.

Clement Rohee

Chants of “Laptop stay quiet!” were heard as the opposition MPs challenged  Ramsammy on his positions.

Shortly after the Deputy Speaker resumed the session and called on MP David-Blair to formally withdraw her statements about the President, which she did.  Riehl said the President could only be named if a motion is tabled in the House. On the issue about interpretation, she said no rule in the Standing Order was breached.

The Deputy Speaker referred to the behaviour displayed by the MPs as “rabble” and stressed that it was uncalled for. She warned that if any further agitations were made the session would have been suspended for the night.

It was a mere two minutes after the comment had left the MP’s lips that the Prime Minister objected to her interpretation of the President’s statement saying he was present at the meeting and had heard no such thing. He referred to David-Blair’s comment as unfortunate saying the President spoke the exact opposite. “The President said that miners would be accommodated and that the money collected would benefit the industry,” Hinds said.

PPP/C MP Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett also objected to the statement saying that David-Blair could not criticize the President in his absence. This was intensely endorsed by the government benches with many of the parliamentarians on that side of the House objecting to David-Blair comments. This quelled for a short while when the Deputy Speaker indicated to the PNCR MP that she first had to move a motion before raising the point about the President.

However, PNCR MPS on the opposition bench rose to defend their colleague saying she was offering her interpretation of what happened at the meeting, noting that it would clearly differ from what the Prime Minister had interpreted. Murray stood up to say that David-Blair was within her right to offer up a comment on the issue given that she was present at the meeting. He stated that the Prime Minister was also within his right to say what he interpreted the statement to mean.

Murray’s comments were instantly rejected by the government benches and the row subsequently erupted.