PPP’s input in Parliament is needed to ensure robust legislation – Harmon

June 23, 2015 11:50 am, [www.inewsguyana.com], Source

Minister of State, Joseph Harmon, says the absence of the opposition Peoples Progressive Party Civic (PPPC) from the National Assembly will erode the Legislature’s scrutiny effect even as the Party says it may not participate in the scrutiny and debate of several pieces of legislation that are to be laid in the National Assembly on Thursday.

It was PPP/C General Secretary, Clement Rohee, who yesterday [Monday] said the Party definitely will not attend Thursday’s National Assembly sitting, and expressed uncertainty as to when it will take its 32 seats during the course of the 11th Parliament.

“I can’t say again for certain when is it we will go to the National Assembly with our MPs, whether it is during the first 100 days, whether it will be to debate those matters.” He did confirm that “for certain we are not going on Thursday to debate the President’s throne speech,” the General Secretary said.

Minister of State, Joseph Harmon.

Two weeks ago, Clerk of the National Assembly, Sherlock Isaacs, said the absence of the Opposition Party from the Legislature will work against its ability to scrutinize the work of the Executive. He said that the various Sectoral Committees, as well as several Standing Committees cannot be established without the Opposition Party’s attendance.

During an interview yesterday, Harmon said the input of the PPP/C in the debating of Bills to be tabled on Thursday may lend to the coining of more robust legislation, as he again called for the Party to take its seats in the National Assembly.

Last week, Parliament Building indicated that government will bring four bills – the Fiscal Management and Accountability Bill 2015, the Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2015, the Former Presidents (Benefits and Other Facilities Bill 2015, and the Local Government (Amendment) Bill 2015 – for first readings in the National Assembly on Thursday, June 25.

It is likely that they will be read for the second time and debated at the following sitting, at which time they will also be voted on.

None of the proposed legislation seeks to amend entrenched constitutional provisions and therefore require only a simple-majority vote in the National Assembly to be passed. In other words, they can be passed without the support of the PPP/C.

Even so, Harmon says, “We are looking forward to the debates. We are prepared for a robust debate. You get better scrutiny and better Bills when they are robustly debated. We trust that Mr. Rohee and the PPP recognise this and go into parliament.”

Harmon also argued that “It is not the right of the Party to decide when to go and when they will not go to the National Assembly… Mr. Rohee is in a representative capacity and when you are representing people you have to ensure that their interests are paramount… it is not, in my view, a right he has to exercise whether the Party comes to the National Assembly, it is a responsibility he has to discharge.”

In the just concluded elections, the A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) + Alliance for Change (AFC) coalition won just over 207,000 of the votes cast while the PPP/C won just over 202,000.

Perhaps, Joseph Harmon has extremely short memory of hardly remembers issues.

There were numerous instances when the then PNC members boycotted parliamentary sessions, only to show up exactly at lunch time to take part with the meals.

Short memories, indeed.

PPP will return to Parliament very soon because they need the money. Rohee and his cohorts aint got taxpayer's money to play with anymore. Now, the free gas Rohee, his cohorts and family were getting for 23 years just get shut off.

 You knucklehead...is this the real reason why you think the PPP will enter Parliament? You sound like the other no brainers out here in la la land. The leaders of the PPP have established that the PPP will file an elections petition and are claiming irregularities during the election. Besides, the PPP is sort out its internal problems. So stop the hating...you are sounding like Shaitaan, who seems to like calling people "Antiman"...he is probably saying more about himself than others.     

Besides, as Dem Guy has said on many occasions, since the "win" was so slim, it is generally grounds for a recount. Why not recount the thing and move on???

If the PPP had won, neither you nor the PPP would have favored a recount, would have screamed that the election was certified free and fair, and would have demonized the PNC for being "disruptive".

Now go drink the same medicine that you all used to gladly dish out!

When the difference in an election result is marginal, there is always an immediate recount with the presence of representatives from all parties.

In Guyana's situation, the difference is less than one percent.

Your solution is based on a premise that you are unable to prove. Anyway, the PPP will decide in the best interest of its membership and those who voted for it (not necessarily in that order)

If the PPP would have won, the PNC terrorists and thugs would have turned GT and surroundings into a fire pit. Coolie blood would have been flowing in the blocked drains of the city.

The usual approach.