Gov’t says…

Democracy at work here. It's the speaker's peroagative. Why didn't the PPP support Nagamootoo for the Speakership?

Nah doan worry wid dat shit Mits, The speaker himself is getting paid by GTT and has been getting paid for years to name only one company who is paying him so he is no better.

They are all bloody shameless and AFC supporters like yourself should be demanding that the AFC and their principals along with the PPP and PNC disclose which companies are retaining parlimentarians and paying them big money.

This is something that should be demanded now not later. Cathy has no credibility she is for sale to the highest bidder.

This is a damn good question Mits. I have to agree with you. The PPP was very spiteful towards Moses and that is the reason why they did not vote for him. To make matters worst they had no objections as to who the Deputy Speaker was, but still they complain about it and mislead their supporters.

Carl Greenidge moved his motion against Finance Minister Dr. Ashni Singh for the restoration of money cut from the National budget he did not provide evidence or documents to support why Dr. Singh should be called before the Privileges Committee.

It is known by the general public that the speaker's decision is bias on the same basis of Dr. Singh vs members of the AFC. 

Clearly your understanding of the word bias may be flawed. Maybe in snake language it means something else.

The Speaker went to England to learn how to be a Speaker BUT he so DUNCE, the trip was a waste of time and money!!

the ppp is just trying to hang the people because they have the ppp shiting themself,cobra go change bar-rat pampers

the wimps is crying what a shame,you fellas run home to mommy kwame

Where did the PPP speaker go to learn about politics...Babu backdam ?

rohee still learning to talk

No, but he also went to Hubu Backdam.

now you know two place hubu backdam and garmont 

He gotta stop hanging on to dat goat

He sidekick Mutt might get bite too.

The court of public opinion will ruled otherwise. If I can see the controversial ruling by the speaker, so is the majority of the Guyanese populace will see it. I rest my case.

the majority of the populace is not a snake

(Guyana Times)A request by the ruling People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) to have the Alliance for Change (AFC) Leader Khemraj Ramjattan and Executive Member Cathy Hughes referred to the Committee of Privileges was overturned. Speaker of the National Assembly Raphael Trotman on Tuesday ruled that prima facie cases have not been made out against the two AFC Members of Parliament.

In a letter dated July 15, Government’s Chief Whip Gail Teixeira made an application for Ramjattan and Hughes to be referred to the Committee of Privileges on the charge of failing to declare pecuniary interests in matters debated in the National Assembly.

In the case of Ramjattan, the Government’s Chief Whip pointed out that in 2013, the AFC Leader voted against allocations for the Specialty Hospital knowing that he was the Attorney representing Fedders Lloyd. Fedders Lloyd was among contractors that bid for the contract. According to the PPP/C, Ramjattan had acted in contravention of Standing Order 107 which states that “No Member of the Assembly shall appear before the Assembly or any Committee thereof as Counsel or Solicitor for any party, or in any capacity for which he or she is to receive a fee or reward.”  Teixeira had also complained that the Proprietor of the Guyana Pegasus Hotel, Robert Badal had publicly declared that “he was a financier of the Alliance For Change at the 2011 General and Regional Elections.” According to the Government, Badal’s objection to the construction of the Marriott Hotel has been perpetuated through the AFC Leader, resulting in him voting against the infrastructural project.

No supporting documentation

The Speaker, in his ruling, noted that no supporting documentation was submitted to support or corroborate either complaint, pointing out too that an extensive period had elapsed before the complaint was lodged. Trotman said if the dignity and propriety of the House have been tarnished or profaned by the acts or omissions of a Member, such acts should have been addressed as a matter of urgency, positing that it would be the National Assembly that would be harmed if there is prolonged stain. “In my considered opinion, to delay or do nothing in the face of what is believed to be a violation of privilege is, in and of itself, a further tarnishing the image of the National Assembly. Neither the alleged violation, nor the delay or failure to address, it should be tolerated,” the Speaker ruled. He further stated that one must question the motive behind a complaint if it was made a year after the matter came to light.

“The Privileges Committee should not be seen as a place of convenience, but manifestly, as one where serious issues are heard and determined,” he said, adding that such a complaint should not be condoned under any circumstances unless there are good and exceptional reasons. He made it clear that there is no evidence implicating the AFC Leader in the allegations laid before the House. “There is no evidence to show that Honourable Khemraj Ramjattan was professionally retained by Fedders Lloyd and that at the time of participating in the debate on the Specialty Hospital, he was accordingly influenced or induced to oppose the project on this basis,” the Speaker further explained.

However, the AFC on August 29, 2012 at a news conference had played down concerns that Ramjattan was in a conflict of interest position over his legal representation of the Fedders Lloyd Corporation, which believes it was cheated of a contract to build the Specialty Hospital at Turkeyen. Ramjattan’s role as lawyer for the Indian firm had long been questioned by the Government, which said the AFC leader has political rather than legitimate motives for objecting to the US$18.1 million contract for the design and construction of the hospital being awarded to Surendra Engineering. Speaking at the AFC’s press conference, party Chairman Nigel Hughes had urged Guyanese not to be distracted by personalities, but focus on whether Fedders Lloyd’s rights were breached. “The real issue is whether or not the procedures that were set out in the tender documents were adhered to. There is no rule in the profession that stops Mr. Ramjattan, who is a practising attorney, from plying his trade as a lawyer,” Hughes told the news conference.

Ramjattan is currently out of the country on business.

Pecuniary interest

Meanwhile, in the case of Hughes, the Government’s Chief Whip opined that Hughes should have disclosed her pecuniary interest, in addition to that of her husband in the Amaila Falls Hydro-Electric Power Project during the debate on the Hydro Electric Bills and the Debt Ceiling motions. It was pointed out that the Amaila Falls Hydro-Project was considered twice by the National Assembly on July 18 and August 7, 2013. “On the first occasion, Mrs Hughes voted against the instruments and on the second she voted in favour of both the Bill and the Motion. In fact during one of the debates of the Bill, a reference was made to Mrs Hughes being the Public Relations Officer to Mr Fip Motilall; clearly this was a fact that was widely known,” the Speaker said.

According to him, it was no secret that Hughes was the Public Relations Officer, stating that prior to the debates on the Bill and the Motion in 2013, she appeared frequently on television promoting the interests of Sithe Global Inc and the Amaila Falls Hydro-Power Project. He further pointed that the AFC MP did not participate in the debates. Like in the case of Ramjattan, Trotman alluded to the period of time that elapsed before the complaint was filed. In ruling he said, “I am unable to find that a prima facie case has been made out against the Honourable Catherine Hughes…” These rulings were met with major objection and disagreement on the part of the Government, which now claims that the Speaker has once again demonstrated his bias.

Did Ramotar consider this when he was squatting on OMAI's board?

Hopefully, the Speaker will use the same line of assessment for government members.

The mind set is to rule unfairly and that creates a problem for the nation to lose confidence in the speaker of the national assembly.

The Nation has lost confidence in the government that is the crux of the matter. Samje?

Perhaps some opposition members have a lack of confidence, but surely not the nation of Guyana.

How far up your poop chute you stuck your head to come up with this conclusion?