It is easy to be confused in Guyana

Feb 09, 2014 Features / Columnists, My Column

---

There was a lot of confusion this past week. For one, there was the problem with the ruling of the Chief Justice over whether the parliamentary opposition could slash the budget. Back in 2012, the opposition found that they really could not support allocations to certain things proposed by the government. One of them was the Government Information Agency (GINA) and the other, the National Communications Network (NCN).
The vote against GINA and NCN had to do with the perception that the nation was paying for a pro-government service, instead of one that catered for the needs of everyone. But from as far back as I could remember, the government-owned news agencies all tended to favour the government. Therefore, NCN and GINA were doing what they thought was in their best interest, and in keeping with expectations.
The truth is that back then when they served the government they were serving the majority of the people. This time there is a minority government. The opposition thought that these agencies should also cater for the majority of the population, which at this time, is represented by the opposition. So the opposition cut their allocations and proceeded to cut other aspects of the budget.
Needless to say, the government protested and took the matter to court. Things get confusing after this because with the parliament being an independent pillar of the constitution, then there was no way any other pillar could intercede. But the courts said that it could and it ruled. This ruling has been the most criticized in recent times.
One view is that the court should not decide what happens within the walls of parliament, because this is not the case in any other country with the Westminster system of government. Another view is that the Chief Justice misinterpreted the constitution and therefore his ruling is flawed.
The Chief Justice is contending that the National Assembly cannot interfere with the Finance Minister’s budget. Cutting or modifications could be made within the Committee of Supply. But even that is seen as being denied by the Chief Justice.
The opposition feels that if it believes that too much money is allocated for a particular subject, then it should be allowed to cut rather than vote down an entire project which may be good for the nation. The confusion continues. The opposition parties say that they will appeal the decision, but the Speaker wants the House to examine the issue before there is an appeal.
I feel that there is going to be even more problems, because in the Committee of Supply when the opposition parties make their amendments, the Minister may very well ignore them. This is where things would get technical; unless the opposition is satisfied it would have to vote against the entire budget, forcing national elections.
The jury is still out, but I would have expected the government to make a strong effort to involve the opposition for talks on the budget, but this is not happening.
The other bit of confusion arose from a publication on the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Bill. The vote on this Bill is likely to be taken tomorrow, but for a few months the view was that the Bill would be consigned to the garbage pile. One newspaper reported that the government had completed deliberations on the Bill in the absence of the opposition.
At a press conference hosted by A Partnership for National Unity, attorney at law Basil Williams accused the government of doing everything to preserve its control over everything in Guyana. Commenting on the invitation by the government for a meeting later that day, Williams said that it would be an exercise in time-wasting to attend.
It turned out that the discussions on the Bill had not been closed and that the opposition still had a chance to insert the modifications they wanted from the outset. I now hear that things are going smoothly between the government and the opposition, and there is the distinct possibility that the opposition may vote for the passage of the Bill.
Some time back, I was angry when the Bill was not passed first time around. I was worried about the sanctions against my country. I was attacked. People accused me of falling for the government’s scare tactics; that nothing like withholding of remittances and the like would happen. My friends were and are wrong.
One friend tried to send money to Guyana from Canada and failed; others spoke of the same thing. My sisters spoke of the problems they would have if they had to send any money for me. Mr Glenn Lall had problems sending money to Trinidad and Tobago to pay for a shipment of printing ink.
I did notice that when I go to the bank to either make a deposit or a withdrawal, I have to present some form of identification. I never had to present identification when making a deposit before.
Guyana has gone through enough these past years. People in the region look on us as those we have the plague, because we are a people running away from a dysfunctional society; a bunch of thieves and forgers and everything bad.
They criticize us for the rampant corruption that is now so commonplace in Guyana and we have a society where young boys now easily turn to a life of crime. Anything more would simply make us all want to pack up and leave.

---

---