President of Parliament and Clerk willfully obstruct process in order to avoid Motion of No Confidence
Democratic process Hijacked in the interest of continuing ‘Mexican Standoff’
In order to keep the public informed regarding the ongoing developments, and in particular what transpired during the Parliamentary Meeting on the morning of Monday, May 13th, the Majority in Parliament has decided to inform the public regarding Monday Morning’s meeting.
In a released statement the Parliamentary Majority comprising of the DP, UP and Independent Laville explained that last week the Majority Coalition Members of Parliament requested an urgent meeting to be held last week in order to discuss the Motion of No Confidence by the Parliamentary Majority against the Ministers Marlin, Jacobs, Pantophlet and Tuitt. This letter requesting the urgent meeting for the end of last week was submitted by letter beforehand using all of the proper channels. The Chairman of Parliament the Hon. Rodolphe Samuel completely ignored the request, other than pointing out a minor and insignificant technicality.
Considering the fact that the request was completely ignored, the Majority Coalition subsequently requested that their agenda point be added to a duly convened meeting of Parliament which was scheduled for Monday, May 13th, a meeting which was requested by the NA Faction and Independent Member Frans Richardson. This request was granted and the agenda point of the Majority Coalition the Motion of No Confidence Against the four Ministers, was also duly added.
Anticipating that the Chairman Rodolphe Samuel would either cancel the meeting or adjourn before the coalition’s agenda point, (the Motion of No Confidence) was reached, the two deputy-chairs of Parliament, who together with the president form the Presidium, requested a meeting of the Presidium before the public meeting of Parliament to discuss proceedings. The President of Parliament agreed to only talk informally with the two Deputy-Chairs of Parliament, resulting in the fact that no formal conclusions could be arrived at in the Presidium.
“The rules of order of Parliament are clear, especially where it concerns: ‘where it is not established by the Rules of Order of Parliament, the Parliament, so a Parliamentary Majority, decides’. This is stated very clearly in the Rules of Order. The flaunting of these rules is a continuation of the so-called standoff mentality of the Parliamentary minority.”
The statement goes on to say that it is further not established in the Rules of Order what Parliament does if the Chair and or Clerk of Parliament refuse to carry out his or her function and willfully obstructs Parliament. This was clearly evident, as all was done in order to avoid the agenda point of the Majority of Parliament being arrived at and thus avoiding the Motion of no Confidence. Taking this into consideration the Parliamentary Majority decided to have the meeting continue and to subsequently appoint an ad-hoc recorder in the person of Mr. E. Gumbs.
The statement ends by reminding the population that all actions which were conducted on the morning of the 13th of May were within the law and the Rules of Order of Parliament. “It is upsetting and disconcerting to know that both the President of Parliament and the Clerk of Parliament obstructed an Agenda Point which was scheduled. It is also unfortunate that misinformation was distributed providing falsities to the people, such as the Parliament being ‘Hijacked’ for example. The only thing hijacked was the democratic process in the interest of continuing the unfortunate policy of “Mexican Stand-offing” instead of Governing.