….Clerk tells PPP
The People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C), if it so desires, will have to table motion at the level of the National Assembly to remove A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) Member of Parliament, David Patterson from the Chairmanship of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
For more than a month, the PPP/C has unsuccessfully tried to have Patterson vacate the post at the level of the PAC but the Clerk of National Assembly, Sherlock Isaacs has advised the Committee that a motion would have to be presented to the 65-member House.
“In fairness to the Clerk of the Assembly, he indicated that the Government by virtue of their majority, can bring the motion to the National Assembly, and if passed can remove me as Chairperson – I thanked him for his advice,” Patterson said in a statement on Wednesday evening.
In an attempt to offer clarity on the issues confronting the PAC, the Chairman explained that when the 7th Meeting of the Committee was called to order at 10:35hrs on Monday, March 15, 2021, PPP/C Member of Parliament, Juan Edghill, rose in objection.
Edghill, the Minister of Public Works, at the time, insisted that the meeting was a continuation of the 6th meeting, which was aborted on February 1, 2021, thus the motion of confidence was still on the floor.
MP Edghill, however, was informed that the 6th Meeting was aborted on instructions of the Speaker of the National Assembly Manzoor Nadir following a meeting with the PAC Chairman, Government’s Chief Whip Gail Teixeira and the Clerk of the Assembly.
But this did not sit well with the five (5) Government MPs on the Committee, who contended that the Speaker has no authority to abort a committee meeting.
As was done on February 1, 2021 when the motion was first tabled, the Clerk of the Assembly was summoned to provide clarification.
“He duly advised that the 6th meeting was correctly aborted, and this meeting was indeed the 7th meeting, not a continuation of the 6th as represented by the government members. Further, a member can table a motion to amend the agenda, at the appropriate stage, to have the motion of confidence included,” the PAC Chairman recalled.
He said in keeping with the Clerk’s advice, the meeting proceeded as per the agenda, until the item “Committee Business” when MP Teixeira sought the Chairman’s permission to move a motion to amend the agenda to include her motion of confidence.
Leave was granted and the motion to amend the agenda was put and passed by the majority.
“Teixeira then proceeded to move a motion to have me removed as chairman of the Committee. At that stage, in accordance with standard protocols coupled with the government position (Edghill in particular) in the 6th meeting, that the Chairman should not preside over a motion of which he is the subject, I recused myself and invited another member to chair the meeting and proceed with the motion. All the opposition members declined to accept the Chairmanship,” Patterson explained.
It was noted that the Clerk’s intervention was sought for a second time that day. It was then that he highlighted that Article 82 (2) of the Standing Orders stated that: “The Chairperson of the Public Accounts Committee must be a member of the MAIN Opposition in the Assembly.”
However, Standing Order 95 (4) which deals with the procedures in select committees generally states: “if the Chairperson is unable to be present at any meeting, the Committee shall elect another Chairperson whose tenure shall be for the day of his or her election.”
Relying on Standing Order 95, PPP/C MPs suggested that one of its Members could be elected Chairperson of the PAC, but Patterson said such would be a clear contravention of the Standing Orders and Constitution of Guyana.
“Clause 95 (4) permits the election of a Chairperson from the eligible members – i.e. only the Opposition members,” Patterson emphasized.
PPP/C MP Sanjeev Datadin being the only lawyer on the Committee, the Clerk had turned to him for advice but Patterson said “quite unsurprisingly, he claimed that Clause 95 outweighed Clause 82, thus the Committee can proceed to elect a government Chairperson.”
APNU+AFC MP Juretha Fernandes, on behalf of the Opposition, objected on the grounds that the advice was not only bad but biased. She submitted that the Clerk should not be relying on a member of the committee for legal advice, who has a vested interest in the outcome of the matter.
The 7th Meeting was then aborted to allow the Clerk to obtain legal guidance on the matter.
Teixeira has not given reason for her motion aimed at removing Patterson from the chair.
