Caption: Speaker Jagdeo Singh
By Alicia Chamely
IF the Opposition wants to ensure that supplementary questions asked of the prime minister will not be denied, then Standing Order 26 needs to be amended.
This was the response of House Speaker Jagdeo Singh, after Opposition Chief Whip Marvin Gonzales accused him of breaking parliamentary traditions and threatening the democratic process after Singh blocked him from asking supplementary questions during last week Friday’s Prime Minister Question Time (PMQ) in Parliament.
Speaking with AZP News on Friday, Singh said it was his opinion that Gonzales wanted to change Standing Order 26 informally instead of seeking the legal procedures to have the Order amended.
Standing Order 26 allows for the Opposition to pose approved questions to the prime minister during the PMQ, which is held once a month in Parliament at the second sitting. Standing Order 26 does not have a provision for the allowance of supplemental questions.
Gonzales argued that despite supplemental questions not being written into law, over the past 15 years former House Speakers Wade Mark and Bridgette Annisette George allowed such questions. He said that it had become a tradition within parliament.
“We believe in order for any democracy to function, for any parliament to function effectively, standing orders of the parliament must be interpreted in accordance with the practice and established practice of this parliament,” Gonzales said, “All we are asking is for the traditions of parliament to be maintained.”
Responding to this, Singh said the parliamentary process had nothing to do with “tradition.”
He said it was job to interpret and follow the lawful regulatory framework set out in the Standing Order and as it stands there was no provision for supplemental questions.
Singh said all processes in parliament must have a legal foundation.
He said it was perhaps time for both the government and the opposition to address the “elephant in the room” and question why a provision for supplemental questions was not included in the Standing Order.
Singh said since he assumed his role “no one can explain to me why that provision is missing, why there is a gap in the regulatory framework.”
He said of the Opposition, “The ball is in their court” if they wanted to have supplementary questions added to Standing Order 26, then they needed to have it done through the processes laid out by the law.
Singh said until Standing Order 26 was amended, the Opposition had the option of submitting questions under Standing Order 28, which allows for four supplementary questions.
He said, “What is the hesitation? Put the question under Standing Order 28, which allows for supplementary questions.”
Responding to insinuations by Gonzales that Singh was taking cues from the government and that the prime minister was “unable to answer the supplemental questions that are being placed and posed to her on her feet,” Singh brushed the accusation off, saying, “Democracy is not about catching people by ambush.”
Singh insisted there was a threat to the nation’s democracy and that tradition did not translate into law. He reiterated should the Opposition want to include supplemental questions into Standing Order 26 then they needed to propose its amendment through the legal framework of parliament.
See related stories below:
