Dear Editor,
I read with much interest the letter by Speaker Manzoor Nadir, dated May 22, 2025, and captioned “The time of scrutiny of financial papers were never limited,” which responded to my letter published in your newspaper on May 19, 2025. Mr. Editor, I will not engage in a tit-for-tat exchange with Mr. Nadir, as the official records of the National Assembly will clearly demonstrate how the business and affairs of the House are managed, particularly regarding the treatment of the Opposition.
I will reiterate, Speaker Nadir is not impartial and consistently demonstrates bias. Furthermore, the 12th Parliament under his leadership has been the worst in recent history, and any semblance of Parliamentary Democracy has eroded.
Since Mr. Nadir saw fit to provide tabulated information, it would have been equally appropriate for him to supply statistics at the meetings of parliamentary committees in accordance with established procedures and practices. For example, the Committee on Security has never been convened since the 12th Parliament commenced. The Committee on Appointments has not met since April 2023. The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) meets irregularly. The Foreign Services Committee has met fewer than ten times, and the same applies to the Economic Services Committee.
Let me address the contents of Mr. Nadir’s letter, which does nothing to change my position. First, it is important for readers to understand that the 12th Parliament has operated as a rubber stamp, despite numerous concerns raised by Opposition members. A simple review of the Supplementary Financial Papers from 2020 to 2024 and an analysis of the questions posed by Opposition members to Government Ministers would reveal the way Speaker Nadir treats the Opposition.
For emphasis, the record will also show that when members attempted to ask questions regarding already-spent funds, they were advised to focus only on funds being requested, this also occurred during budget debates. I suspect Speaker Nadir’s posture may shift during the 104th Sitting of the National Assembly on Friday, May 23, 2025, when the first Financial Paper for 2025 is scheduled for scrutiny.
For the public record, I wish to state that at no time has there been agreement between the Government and the Opposition regarding the scrutiny of Financial Papers (for the exception of budgets, where there is agreed timing for agencies). Therefore, my letter of May 19, 2025, reflects the broader reality of how the Assembly functions.
Regarding Mr. Nadir’s comments about motions and questions, I, like many colleagues, have had motions initially approved of by him and placed in the Order Paper. However, on both occasions when my motions, focused on addressing the high cost of living, were scheduled for debate, they were inexplicably withdrawn on the grounds that they contravened Standing Order 22. In other examples, no-confidence motions against Dr. Frank Anthony and Mr. Manzoor Nadir in 2021 simply disappeared. We were informed that these motions were being reviewed by the Attorney General’s Chambers.
Additionally, a review of the Order Paper for the 104th Sitting of the National Assembly will reveal asterisks beside motions by Ms. Geeta Chandan-Edmond, MP, on the killing of the Henry boys (published on December 12, 2020), and Mr. David Patterson, MP, on Natural Gas Flaring… (published on February 26, 2021). Mr. Nadir’s excuse for not proceeding with these motions was that they were sub judice. However, it is critical to note that these motions were submitted, approved, and placed on the Order Paper well before any court proceedings had begun.
Turning now to the questions mentioned by Mr. Nadir, I acknowledge his statistics on the number of questions submitted and approved. However, he failed to explain why many questions are ‘watered down’ and why he permits Government Ministers to give responses that, in my view, are both unacceptable and inappropriate in a Parliamentary Democracy. I could cite numerous examples, but in the interest of space, I will highlight just one: the infamous “200 new taxes.” I have attached the response provided by Dr. Ashni Singh, which Speaker Nadir allowed, for your readers to judge for themselves.
In conclusion, I wish to state firmly and without hesitation that I stand by every word written in my letter of May 19, 2025. I am a responsible individual, and all my claims are fact-checked before publication. They can withstand any scrutiny. Once again, I emphasize, the 12th Parliament of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana has regressed under the micromanagement of Mr. Manzoor Nadir. It appears even the decision on where meals are ordered from for National Assembly sittings is made unilaterally by him, despite a committee chaired by him, that is supposed to make such decisions collectively
Yours truly,
Annette Ferguson, MP
