Well played, PM

Prime Minister Bruce Golding demonstrated at last week's sitting of the House of Representatives that his back might be against the wall, but he still has a few cards up his sleeve.

Golding flicked out his ace when he expressed a willingness to have the no-confidence motion that the parliamentary Opposition had initiated against him debated before the anti-crime bills - on the same day it was tabled.

The no-confidence motion was precipitated by Golding's conduct in the Manatt, Phelps & Phillips scandal in which he combatively sought to defend withholding information that he sanctioned talks with the United States law firm.

Golding's 'political magnanimity' left the Opposition stunned.

Opposition members, led by the fumbling Derrick Kellier, had entered the parliamentary chamber prepared to demonstrate how unprepared they were to debate four of the six anti-crime bills.

The government side had argued in the lead-up to last Tuesday's sitting that the Opposition should have been armed to go into battle as the bills had been the subject of extensive deliberations over a near two-year span.

The Opposition clearly came to fuss over debating the bills (and who to tell, possibly stage a walkout), but Golding was quicker on the draw.

He signalled that he would defer the verbal match on the anti-crime bills for the debate on his head, demonstrating confidence that he would prevail over the no-confidence motion.

Thank goodness, opposition members did not quibble about debating the no-confidence motion last Tuesday after the hectic public-relations campaign they had profiled.

Still fresh are the recollections of the public that the Opposition had made a fool of itself earlier this year when it kicked up a storm about a debate on the economy which it had strenuously demanded.

And so the debate got under way.

Onslaught

Opposition Leader Portia Simpson Miller, in whose name the motion was tabled, would naturally lead off.

In an atmosphere that was bound to be pregnant with anticipation of the onslaught that was to be unleashed on the already beleaguered prime minister, government members were ready to defend their political leader.

Simpson Miller fired the first salvo and many more, spending an unnecessarily long time arguing why Golding had lost the confidence of Parliament.

As the adage goes, the best form of defence is attack.

And that is just what the government side did, assailing Simpson Miller for reading from a prepared text - a parliamentary infraction that has not been observed in recent memory.

Our parliamentarians, on both sides of the divide, invariably deliver presentations from prepared texts.

Some have mastered the art, others fumbling miserably.

The occasions on which many seem capable of speaking well extemporaneously are when they are engaged in ugly tracing matches or launching some unseemly broadsides on rival political colleagues.

Simpson Miller is one of the 60 who constantly speaks from prepared texts.

Government member Robert Montague raised an objection, as it is his right - one that he had never exercised before.

Engaging the Parliament in diversionary tactics has been a ploy used by the superior forces in Parliament from time immemorial.

The former government's parliamentary team was a master of the game.

The Jamaica Labour Party now seems to be following suit.

Tuesday's sitting erupted as a gleeful government bellowed and opposition members howled.

Simpson Miller seemed somewhat mesmerised as she waited for the ruling.

In the end, it was Leader of Government Business Andrew Holness, who rose to quell the brewing storm in a teacup.

He requested that Simpson Miller be allowed to continue.

Speaker of the House Delroy Chuck, who rarely seems to refer to the standing orders to rule on any matter, took the tack from Holness.

Chuck said Simpson Miller must be allowed to speak because the rules relating to reading speeches were usually bent anyway.

Wrong again, Speaker!

That cannot be the reason for allowing any of the 60 members in the House to bend a rule because it has become something of the norm.

Changed course

The Gavel submits that the state cannot cease fighting crime because criminal activities seem to be the norm in Jamaica.

If the rules of engagement are going to be compromised by no less than the opposition leader and aided and abetted by the Speaker of the House, why bother with them?

Amend the standing orders of Parliament if the members are going to flout them.

It was refreshing to see that Simpson Miller changed course and delivered her arguments with only peeks at her copious notes.

On another note, politicians continue to think that the length of their speeches is more important that the content - perhaps that is why there is so much empty talk in Parliament.

The presentations were too long, the repetitions inevitable.

In this vein, Opposition Spokesman on National Security, Peter Bunting, must be commented for his rather succinct presentation.

With the no-confidence motion out of the way, predictably defeated by the thin majority which became even thinner last week with the removal of government member Shahine Robinson from the parliamentary chamber, Golding lived to fight another day.

The prime minister even won the political chess game as the Opposition would have to participate in the debate on the crime bills, with no excuse to walkout.