How will APNU vote?

Jun 24, 2016 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

There has never been an issue over the legality of the contract signed between the City of Georgetown and the company which is expected to roll out parking meters in the city from September. There has been no issue over the legality of any contract. There has been an issue over the transparency of the arrangement.

The Deputy Mayor has complained that he did not see the contract. Other councillors have been quoted in the media as expressing ignorance of the deal. Concern has also been expressed that this deal did not go out to tender.
The public have had their concerns. Concerns have been expressed as to whether the council got the best deal possible. Reports have indicated that the city will get 20% of the revenues of the project.
The decision of the government to review the legality of the contract does not really address the concerns that have been expressed. It does not address the issue of the secrecy of the deal, and it does not address the issue of whether the best deal possible was achieved. In addition, it certainly does not address the concerns of the public, who will now have to pay fees for parking in the city.
The actions of the government, therefore, do not bring any relief or comfort to those who have issues with the deal, because the government is only examining the legality of the arrangement and not the transparency, or whether the council has been shortchanged.
The government may have gotten a rude awakening, whether after it was reported that one Minister had said that the deal was being placed on hold, officials of the Council implied that the deal was still going through. This may have made the government realize that it was impotent when dealing with the Council and that the only way it could have reversed the deal was to find an illegality. This is one explanation.
The other explanation is that the government is in support of the deal, but recognizes the need to show the public that it is not deaf to the claims about lack of transparency.
A third explanation is that the government is walking the tight rope between not interfering in the work of the Council, while trying to ensure that nothing illegal was done.
All three positions leave the public out in the cold, because if the review does not establish an illegality, then this is licence for the council to go ahead.
The public’s interest is not going to be addressed by the government, because the government is only looking at the legality. If there is an illegality then all the Council has to do is fix it, except of course, if the illegality concerns the right to charge parking fees.
The government may not be able to act, but it is not the government that is represented in Council, it is the political APNU+AFC coalition. The parties to this coalition can ask their members to either vote this measure down, or pass a vote of no confidence in those who made this deal behind their backs.
It is left to be seen what position the leadership of both the AFC and APNU will do. The problem here is that the AFC does not command the same percentage of seats in the council as it does in the National Assembly, and the opposition has a negligible role in the Council.
It is therefore all up to APNU to overturn this deal. How will APNU vote? For it or against it?

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News