The Speaker's involvement and gov't divide

The Speaker is the chief officer and highest authority of the House of Representatives and must remain politically impartial at all times. But despite acting in that capacity for a brief while last week, South Trelawny Member of Parliament Marisa Dalrymple-Philibert appeared to be most ignorant of this.

While presiding in the absence of Speaker Delroy Chuck, who had stepped outside, the deputy speaker, who has been around since 2007, decided to participate in a debate.

"May I remind us that the longest journey starts with the first step. I think that as a government we are taking the first step," Dalrymple-Philibert said while presiding over the affairs of the House on Tuesday.

Her input, which came before a vote, represented an extension to a debate on a resolution brought by Finance Minister Audley Shaw, who was seeking Parliament's approval for the guarantee of US$20 million from the Caribbean Development Bank to the Students' Loan Bureau. The matter was not a contentious one which, perhaps, may have given Dalrymple-Philibert the idea that she could join the debate.

However, parliamentary procedures make it clear that Speakers or other presiding officers do not enter into debate on any matter that is before the House.

This is in keeping with the impartial stance required of them. One wonders what would have happened if any member of the House had called for a divide and Dalrymple-Philibert was called upon to be fair and impartial on a matter on which she has already taken a position. Luckily, Tuesday's resolution did not elicit any such bitter divide in a parliament split 32 government members to 28 opposition members.

Meanwhile, one sign of divide crept on to the government front bench on Tuesday. Shaw snapped at Leader of Government Business Andrew Holness after Central Kingston Member of Parliament Ronald Thwaites craved the minister's indulgence to postpone the debate on the credit reporting regulations. Parliament has already passed the Credit Reporting Bill and, on Tuesday, Shaw wanted the Lower House to consider the regulations, but Thwaites said he was not informed it would be taken.

"I, for one, would wish the opportunity to prepare myself and question what is there. I did not avail myself because I did not know it was going to be taken," Thwaites said.

At that, Shaw turned to Holness and asked: "You normally have the agenda?" He then proceeded to address the Speaker: "I have the agenda that comes to me at least a day before," Shaw began, but was stopped in his strides by Holness. "Let me address it minister, if you will allow me," Holness said.

Shaw would have none of it. He was now upset. "You asked me to address it so let me finish!" Shaw snapped.

He then told the Speaker that the credit reporting regulations were on the agenda presented to him and reminded members that once a matter has been tabled it is the duty of every member to make himself familiar.

The jury, meanwhile, is still out on whether it is Holness who has been tardy in leading the business of the House, particularly in the case of the credit reporting regulations. Or perhaps Holness did his job and informed his opposite member Derrick Kellier who did not bother to tell the members on his side. Whatever it is, the situation is as untidy as in the Upper House, where senators, after being idle for three months, were given one day's notice of a resumption of those sittings.

thegavel@gleanerjm.com