How serious is the PLP?
tribune242 editorial:
COMMENTING on our June 17 editorial - posted on The Tribune's website and headed: "Is this a gimmick for press headlines?" - a reader asked:
"Is it so, as the PLP claim, that the PM ended the Budget debate midstream in the committee stage? If so (and it was on TV for all to see) then is that not an example of denying the Opposition the right to freedom of speech on behalf of the Bahamian people?
"You don't have to like the PLP and you surely have the right to be an FNM partisan. However, in order to have some level of credibility, don't defend obvious wrong."
We are not defending an obvious wrong, nor do we intend to defend an opposition's attitude of arrogant entitlement -- that rules were not made for them.
In all facets of life to achieve harmony precedents are established and rules and procedures are followed.
So too in parliamentary debates. The debate to which our web site commentator refers is governed by constitutional rules. The rule that Opposition Fox Hill MP Fred Mitchell was trying to get around was one that does not allow amendment of a money bill that would change the state of the Treasury unless moved by a Cabinet Minister on the recommendation of the Cabinet. Mr Mitchell, not a cabinet minister, was obviously trying to exempt himself from acknowledging that this rule also governed the Opposition.
The Budget Communication was presented to the House on May 26 by Prime Minister Ingraham. The following week debate opened and all 41 House members -17 of them Opposition- spoke. At that time they could dissect and amend any part of the Budget they wanted. The Budget had to be completed before July 1- three days from now when it goes into effect. Well in advance of the debate government gave its timeline on how it proposed to proceed with the debate and projected when it should be completed. The Opposition had ample time to study the proposed Budget and if members had any policy issues they could have circulated draft amendments - including the one Mr Mitchell moved in the House -- for cabinet consideration. Obviously they did not do this.
After fully debating the Bill, the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole with the Speaker retiring from the chamber and the chairman taking the chair.
The Opposition, not having the numbers to defeat any part of the Bill, obviously decided to filibuster, and the filibuster started during examination of the estimates and expenditure of recurrent accounts. According to the Bahamas constitution, no amendment can be made to a money bill except by a cabinet minister with the full consent of the cabinet. As our readers know, Mr Mitchell is not a cabinet minister, and if he were serious he should have submitted his amendment for cabinet consideration well before the start of the debate-- he certainly had enough time to do so.
Because of the seriousness of the economy, the object of this Budget was to cut costs. Instead, Mr Mitchell proposed that funeral payments be increased from the present $650 to $1,300 per person for at least 1000 persons.
Mr Ingraham, obviously realising the Opposition's plan to delay passing of the Budget, warned Mr Mitchell that if he went down that road, he (Mr Ingraham) would move for closure. There is no debate on closure.
Not heeding the warning, the Opposition put the amendment. It was voted down. PLP MP Melanie Griffin by that time was on her feet with another motion -- the Opposition's plan to slow procedure became even more obvious as it appeared that one Opposition amendment was to follow another. The chairman ignored her. Closure was put. The Opposition packed their bags and left. The government continued to move the associated Budget Bills. It went through the Capital budget. So for the PLP to give the impression that the Budget process ended and nothing else was dealt with after they walked out, is just not true. The Budget was completed and passed after their disappearance.
However, what is of interest is that the item to cut parliamentary salaries was very high on the estimates of recurrent expenditure -- as a matter of fact it was Head 3. By the time closure came members were already on Head 44. This was an item about which the Opposition had expressed great concern. Government suggested cutting MPs' salaries by 5 per cent. Opposition Leader Perry Christie disagreed. He said the Opposition wanted salaries cut by 10 per cent. But Head 3 came and went and not a squeak from the Opposition about cutting anything. Why didn't they attempt to move a resolution on this one?
When FNM MP Carl Bethel pointed out this oversight, Dr Bernard Nottage, replied that a separate resolution on salaries was further down on the agenda and that is when they had intended to make their move to have parliamentary salaries reduced to 10 per cent rather than the FNM's five per cent recommendation. They missed the opportunity at Head 3 of the Estimates and skipped out of the House before their anticipated moment came for them to make a big splash by shaving a further five per cent off their parliamentary salaries for the sake of the people.
And so if they were really serious about increasing benefits for burying the indigent dead, and cutting their parliamentary salaries, all they had to do was follow the constitution and parliamentary rules. In other words there is no entitlement to bend the rules and no one is above the constitution -- not even the PLP.
Therefore we stand by our editorial of June 17 that in our opinion the PLP manoeuvres in the House were just gimmicks to attract headlines and impress the less informed.
June 27, 2010
tribune242 editorial
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Showing posts with label Melanie Griffin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Melanie Griffin. Show all posts
Monday, June 28, 2010
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham: Opposition Leader Perry Christie failed to use '07 constituency allowance
By Krystel Rolle ~ Guardian Staff Reporter ~ krystel@nasguard.com:
Opposition Leader Perry Christie did not use any of the $100,000 allocated by the government for projects in his Farm Road constituency in 2007/2008, according to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham.
But Christie explained that he was taking time to focus on completing necessary and effective projects.
Ingraham made the revelation on Sunday while responding to suggestions by the Progressive Liberal Party that the government would neglect Elizabeth if voters there do not elect Dr. Duane Sands as their member of Parliament next week.
"We continue to demonstrate that we don't do work in constituencies because of who [the constituents] support," said Ingraham during a news conference on Sunday.
"In fact, in some constituencies where we made monies available like $100,000 for the MPs to decide on what should be done in the constituency, people like Mr. Perry Christie in the first year didn't spend any of the money at all. He determined in the first year that there wasn't anything to be done while others like Yamacraw [MP Melanie Griffin] and St. Cecilia [Cynthia 'Mother' Pratt] overspent because they figured they had needs in their constituency to be dealt with."
Yesterday, Christie admitted that he took longer to spend his constituency allowance than others did, but he said it was not because there was no work to be done in that area.
Christie said that during the year in question, his constituency office was planning how best it could use the allowance.
He said plans are now in place to expand three parks in his constituency and to add bathroom facilities in at least two of the parks.
He said both the Hay Street park and the Sunlight Village park are heavily used and do not have bathrooms. The Fowler Street park needs to be expanded, he said.
Christie said he has asked the government to acquire adjoining property to make it larger, and to completely refurbish the park.
He said the work is extensive and would cost more than the $100,000 allowance.
"If he's saying that I didn't use the money as quickly as some of the other MPs, he's probably dead right," said Christie, who added that by planning what he would do more thoroughly he probably used the money more efficiently.
"I don't know what Ingraham was intending to achieve by making that announcement but my sense was that I had to somehow expand the parks and I'm doing that."
Christie said the Ministry of Works recently acknowledged that its employees visited the site and took measurements of the parks. It has also been acknowledged that the bids went out to complete the work, Christie added.
The government also allocated $100,000 in fiscal year 2008/2009 to each MP for projects in the various constituencies.
February 09, 2010
thenassauguardian
Opposition Leader Perry Christie did not use any of the $100,000 allocated by the government for projects in his Farm Road constituency in 2007/2008, according to Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham.
But Christie explained that he was taking time to focus on completing necessary and effective projects.
Ingraham made the revelation on Sunday while responding to suggestions by the Progressive Liberal Party that the government would neglect Elizabeth if voters there do not elect Dr. Duane Sands as their member of Parliament next week.
"We continue to demonstrate that we don't do work in constituencies because of who [the constituents] support," said Ingraham during a news conference on Sunday.
"In fact, in some constituencies where we made monies available like $100,000 for the MPs to decide on what should be done in the constituency, people like Mr. Perry Christie in the first year didn't spend any of the money at all. He determined in the first year that there wasn't anything to be done while others like Yamacraw [MP Melanie Griffin] and St. Cecilia [Cynthia 'Mother' Pratt] overspent because they figured they had needs in their constituency to be dealt with."
Yesterday, Christie admitted that he took longer to spend his constituency allowance than others did, but he said it was not because there was no work to be done in that area.
Christie said that during the year in question, his constituency office was planning how best it could use the allowance.
He said plans are now in place to expand three parks in his constituency and to add bathroom facilities in at least two of the parks.
He said both the Hay Street park and the Sunlight Village park are heavily used and do not have bathrooms. The Fowler Street park needs to be expanded, he said.
Christie said he has asked the government to acquire adjoining property to make it larger, and to completely refurbish the park.
He said the work is extensive and would cost more than the $100,000 allowance.
"If he's saying that I didn't use the money as quickly as some of the other MPs, he's probably dead right," said Christie, who added that by planning what he would do more thoroughly he probably used the money more efficiently.
"I don't know what Ingraham was intending to achieve by making that announcement but my sense was that I had to somehow expand the parks and I'm doing that."
Christie said the Ministry of Works recently acknowledged that its employees visited the site and took measurements of the parks. It has also been acknowledged that the bids went out to complete the work, Christie added.
The government also allocated $100,000 in fiscal year 2008/2009 to each MP for projects in the various constituencies.
February 09, 2010
thenassauguardian
Friday, January 8, 2010
Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) MPs react to Malcolm Adderley's resignation
By BRENT DEAN ~ Guardian Senior Reporter ~ brentldean@nasguard.com:
Several prominent Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) MPs have expressed disappointment at the decision by Malcolm Adderley to resign his Elizabeth constituency seat.
"Well, it is always disappointing when you would lose a colleague in any circumstances really," said PLP MP for Yamacraw Melanie Griffin. Her constituency borders Elizabeth.
She expressed further disappointment that "fences could not be mended" between the party and Adderley for the betterment of the people of Elizabeth.
"But Elizabeth knows that Yamacraw has always been there for them. We have done our best to support them and we'll always be there," she said.
PLP Deputy Leader Philip Brave Davis said Adderley had regularly told them that he was a PLP. "And we always thought he would remain a PLP," added Davis, who is also the Cat Island, Rum Cay and San Salvador MP.
Davis said that if Adderley considered himself a PLP he could have remained with the organization despite having differences with its leadership.
"Well, you never want to lose a member... but you respect the decision that's made by our colleague. Malcolm and I were pretty close – we got along very well," said West End and Bimini MP Obie Wilchcombe.
"In fact when I was minister of Tourism I appointed him the chairman of the Gaming Board. So we had a wonderful relationship."
Wilchcombe, who is also leader of opposition business, added that despite the loss of a member, the PLP moves on.
"The party obviously will reminisce on his contribution, but we are moving toward what we have to do in the future and we're not going to be distracted by any departure," he said.
"The Progressive Liberal Party has a lot of work to do. The party has to now look at its message in the years moving forward. We have to look at our messengers – all – all who represent the constituencies and we have to determine how we're going to proceed."
It is expected that the Elizabeth by-election will be held in February.
It is still unclear if the PLP will contest the by-election. The party has said it lacks funds and that the process surrounding Adderley's resignation is problematic.
The opposition has accused the government and prime minister of offering Adderley a post as a Supreme Court justice, threatening the separation between the branches of government.
January 8, 2010
thenassauguardian
Several prominent Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) MPs have expressed disappointment at the decision by Malcolm Adderley to resign his Elizabeth constituency seat.
"Well, it is always disappointing when you would lose a colleague in any circumstances really," said PLP MP for Yamacraw Melanie Griffin. Her constituency borders Elizabeth.
She expressed further disappointment that "fences could not be mended" between the party and Adderley for the betterment of the people of Elizabeth.
"But Elizabeth knows that Yamacraw has always been there for them. We have done our best to support them and we'll always be there," she said.
PLP Deputy Leader Philip Brave Davis said Adderley had regularly told them that he was a PLP. "And we always thought he would remain a PLP," added Davis, who is also the Cat Island, Rum Cay and San Salvador MP.
Davis said that if Adderley considered himself a PLP he could have remained with the organization despite having differences with its leadership.
"Well, you never want to lose a member... but you respect the decision that's made by our colleague. Malcolm and I were pretty close – we got along very well," said West End and Bimini MP Obie Wilchcombe.
"In fact when I was minister of Tourism I appointed him the chairman of the Gaming Board. So we had a wonderful relationship."
Wilchcombe, who is also leader of opposition business, added that despite the loss of a member, the PLP moves on.
"The party obviously will reminisce on his contribution, but we are moving toward what we have to do in the future and we're not going to be distracted by any departure," he said.
"The Progressive Liberal Party has a lot of work to do. The party has to now look at its message in the years moving forward. We have to look at our messengers – all – all who represent the constituencies and we have to determine how we're going to proceed."
It is expected that the Elizabeth by-election will be held in February.
It is still unclear if the PLP will contest the by-election. The party has said it lacks funds and that the process surrounding Adderley's resignation is problematic.
The opposition has accused the government and prime minister of offering Adderley a post as a Supreme Court justice, threatening the separation between the branches of government.
January 8, 2010
thenassauguardian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)