The government is not fooling anyone
The citizens of Georgetown did not vote for a Mayor. They voted to elect Councillors. It is the Councillors who picked from amongst themselves, the person whom they wanted to be their leader.
If the Councillors have the power to freely elect their Mayor. They should have the power to ask that person to step down if the Council so feels.
The Council is not a rubber stamp. The Councilors should have a say in the affairs of the Municipality. This is why they were put there. Half of them were elected as representatives of their constituencies. The other half is representing their parties or groupings.
So far, of all the Councillors, only the Deputy Mayor and the groupings which had independent candidates on the Council have publicly expressed concern about the parking meter scandal.
The PPP has called for consultations on the matter. It therefore means that at best only five of the 30 elected Councillors have publicly expressed reservations about the parking meter concern.
What about the other 25 councilors? Where do they stand on the issue of the parking meters and the contract that was signed? Are they in agreement with how things were done?
They should say. If they do not they will be playing right into the hands of those who feel that in time the controversy will blow over and the contract will stand.
The strategy of those behind the deal is obvious. They will ride out the storm. Within two months, they feel that all the fuss will disappear and the Council will be free to go ahead with the contract.
The issue of the parking meters should be discussed in Council. The decision to have parking meters should not be a done deal. It must be sanctioned by the Council.
The full Council must discuss this matter and arrive at a decision as to whether they will support the contract or disapprove it. If it disapproved, it will most likely see the resignation of those involved in its signing. This matter must be placed on the next agenda of the Council and must be exhaustively debated and voted upon.
Right now, it is shocking that more councillors are not adding their voices of dissent to the manner in which this arrangement has been pursued. A contract was signed, the full Council was not aware of when it was signed. They should be aware of the details now and therefore be in a position to make a decision as to whether they will approve of it or sanction those who were involved in its signing.
There are obvious legal implications involved. This is why the Councillors should take seriously the actions of those who signed it without the approval of the full Council.
The majority of the Councilors may wish to preserve unity and therefore opt to remain silent at this time. This is not necessarily an understandable position. The coalition is one year old. There have been cracks before and these cracks within the coalition have forced action to bring parties together.
Those who wish to remain silent are not doing the coalition any good by their actions.
Things are at a stalemate. It seems as if a decision is being awaited from the government. But the Council itself does not need the government to decide on the legality of the contract. They can ask a legal firm to give them an opinion on this.
The issue is not one of legality. The issue is about transparency. The issue is about whether this measure is in the public interest. The issue is about whether citizens have gotten the best deal. The issue is about whether there is a need for parking meters.
The government has sworn to protect the public interest. But it is only examining the legality of the contract, not how the parking meters will affect the pockets of citizens and the bottom line of businesses.
What was preventing the government from undertaking a study to determine the effects of the parking meter contract on citizens and businesses? What is preventing them from doing that?
The government is playing a game. It is acting for the sake of acting. Its actions do not address the issues of greatest concern to the public. And the government while claiming to act is also claiming not to interfere.
The government is not fooling anyone.