No rational mind can support the airport and Marriott projects until the feasibility studies are made public

Mar 21, 2013 Letters

Dear Editor,
In rejecting the ex parte application from Mr. Anil Nandlall to put aside the decision of the National Assembly in support of a smaller quantum for the 2012 Budget, the Chief Justice made it clear that in accordance with Section 222 of the Constitution, only those entities cited in the Third Schedule (the Ethnic Relations Commission is one such entity), can be financed as a direct charge on the Consolidated Fund. Thus his sound instructions to restore the sum assigned for the ERC is duly noted and supported.
It would be quite interesting to observe if amounts were actually charged on the Consolidated Fund for other agencies not in the Third Schedule (NCN, GINA, One Laptop project, etc.). The key issue remains in accordance with Section 120 of the Constitution, that expenditures can only be charged to the Consolidated Fund, “…subject to the approval of the National Assembly”.
From the empirical evidence at our disposal, the Minister reported to the National Assembly on April 26th, 2012 that the Committee of Supply recommended a reduced 2012 Budget. He so sought approval for the amended (reduced) 2012 Budget from the National Assembly. This approval was so granted for an amended (reduced) 2012 Budget by the National Assembly that said night.
Thus we remain very amused at all the legal flouncing done in 2012 by an office holder in the Attorney General Chambers. It is Budget time again and it is our hope that this individual will not attempt to launch another wave of fundamentally flawed legal interpretations of the Constitution.
This now bring us to the finalized actual expenditure for 2012. In addition to scrutinizing the 2013 estimates, it is expected that the majority opposition and their army of lawyers will also scrutinize the 2012 actual expenditure to ascertain if there was any unauthorized and illegal spending in 2012 – namely NCN, GINA, One Laptop etc. If the empirical evidence is there to support such illegality, then there is enough justification to commence immediate parliamentary proceedings against the relevant delinquent parties – for them to be interrogated in front of the Privileges Committee of Parliament. If found guilty of violating the Parliamentary Standing Orders, it is hoped that good sense will prevail and relevant Parliamentary action including possible financial surcharges, if necessary, is instituted to preserve the rule of law in the highest decision-making body in the land.
We are of the firm conclusion that the airport expansion and the Marriott project cannot be feasibly supported by any rational mind until the feasibility studies are released for public consumption. Interesting times lie ahead in the Committee of Supply as they consider the 2013 Budget.
Dr Asquith Rose and Harish S. Singh

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News