The Tribune

By EARYEL BOWLEG

Tribune Staff Reporter

ebowleg@tribunemedia.net

FREE National Movement leader Michael Pintard said the opposition party is challenging those in the House of Assembly’s Rules Committee to modify the rules so that no administration can “duck” Parliament’s question and answer period.

The opposition has continuously pushed to have this period honoured and last week the House of Assembly was suspended after a screaming match erupted when Mr Pintard chastised the government for avoiding it.

However, Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis called the opposition’s actions “despicable behaviour” while Obie Wilchcombe, the leader of government business and Social Services minister, described the FNM’s actions in Parliament as just a “show” and a misuse of the media.

Mr Pintard responded to their comments while on the radio programme “Darold Miller Live”.

“I saw in the papers today both the Prime Minister and the minister with responsibility for social services berated the opposition for us standing up in the House of Assembly because we are sick and tired of them ducking and dodging questions in the House of Assembly,” the FNM leader said.

“They will do any and everything to avoid the second Wednesday of the month... it’s very undemocratic behaviour. This is why we must modify the rules of the House of Assembly that if you miss the second Wednesday of the month and you cannot answer the questions, questions are then answered in the very next sitting.

“So you don’t have to wait until the next Wednesday of the House. They have not yet modified the rules and we are challenging them in the Rules Committee to modify the rules so that no administration can duck questions and answer that’s the first point.”

He also spoke out against Mr Wilchcombe on the matter.

“On Monday, we will address the questions. Minister Wilchcombe said in other words we should be grateful that they’re giving us one. You’re not giving us one day — you are permitting the democratic process to work that you have (avoided) for so many months.

“So it is appropriate that we answer questions.”

The House of Assembly Rule 39 (2) states that unless the House determines otherwise, the House shall proceed, on the second Wednesday in each month, with the agenda that allows for question time.

Yet, governing parties have traditionally proceeded with their own agenda, thus not making time for the question period. The Minnis administration was criticised for failing to observe this period while in office.

But Mr Pintard, who was a part of that administration, argued that some people did answer questions.

“So if the media, if the government is interested when … they like to say things like, ‘oh, y’all didn’t answer questions when you’re in the House.’ Well, we left some questions on the table. Michael Pintard wasn’t in the number by the way. I answered every question as far as I remember, Jeff Lloyd answered every question - I could go on.

“I wasn’t unique. There were others who answered every question that was raised in the House. I remember Desmond, Desmond Bannister who was very meticulous about trying to (answer). Some of them were not answered. The PLP left hundreds in their previous iteration in government.

“So this nonsense about you all did not answer all the questions I’m saying to you, yes, that’s true for some persons... (but) I answered every question. We are holding you to account so that you can show what good governance is like. Answer the question, answer the question. So we stand by the actions that we took. It’s not grandstanding.”

Mr Pintard was also asked by Mr Miller if he is in favour of the legalisation of cannabis.

Mr Pintard said he did not support it being legalised for recreational use but is supportive of medical marijuana.

“It depends on what you’re referring to; if you’re saying for recreational purposes, no, I’m not I’m not, I wasn’t in the last administration. When we were in government I was one of several members of the Cabinet who consulted with the various stakeholders whether it’s the faith-based organisations, entrepreneurs that are interested in the cannabis industry, as well as the Rastafarian movement, which ought to be a pivotal part of this discussion, etc.

“So, while I was not supportive, nor did I get a sense that there was a consensus among those persons who the commission spoke to because the commission did not come back with a recommendation either for the endorsement of legalisation of cannabis for recreational purposes, however, for medicinal marijuana, I think that that is a time, the time for that has come.”

However, he said he needs to see the legislation the Davis administration plans to implement before fully committing his support for the move.