Sunday, September 23, 2012

Letter: PNM member not impressed with party's stand

God is great! And what you ent meet yet ent pass you yet!
After all the hoorah, my party is finally admitting it was part and parcel of the whole process that ended up delivering a major misstep called Section 34! At least that's how I'm reading what Camile Regis said as reported in Sean Lord's story in today's Guardian, PNM to withhold support on special majority bills.

If you remember, Section 34 needed a special number of votes to pass? My party DID NOT HOLD BACK on that vote! The law passed! If it didn't pass, no proclamation, premature, full term, or induced, could have taken place!

Yet they rarhrahing up and down the place playing sainty sainty when all of them had their hands in the cookie jar. 

They calling for Cabinet to resign and fresh elections saying Cabinet cannot avoid it was collectively responsible for givng the greenlight for early proclamation, but ignoring the whole parliament collectively responsible for making the law, they refuse to call for their own resignations from parliament and PNM office too, because they brought shame to my party by sleeping when they needed to be vigilant.

Under Dr Williams and Mr Chambers that would have NEVER happened.
C’mon peeps, what happened here? I don't have any great insight of how Cabinet does handle its business, but I know a thing or two about procedure during party group meetings and conventions. 

From what I can make out, especially from the detailed information the Prime Minister gave in her speech, which was published in all the newspapers (I have a copy right in front me as I'm typing), there are quite a few questions any sensible person would ask if they want to get to the truth.
  • Didn't the Cabinet rely on Volney's assurances that the Chief Justice AND the DPP both approved? Answer, yes!
  • Wasn't Volney a senior Cabinet MInister at the time? Yes!
  • Wasn't Volney THE Minister responsible for the agenda item being discussed at the time? Yes!
  • Was Volney fumbling and bumbling when he was answering questions asked by others in the meeting concerning his report? No! Otherwise the Chairman of the meeting would have deferred putting forward the report for a vote and instead issued a directive to the Attorney general or Legal Affairs minister to take over and fill in the blank spaces in the report and bring it back to the next meeting. And she would have put a good tongue lashing on Volney in front everybody, maybe even suspend or fire him on the spot.
Was Cabinet collectively sleeping like my party was in parliament so whoever was secretary to the meeting mistakenly recorded their nodding heads as a collective sign of yes to Volney's proposal? Answer, No! Because no secretary would do that.

Why didn't my party simply come out and say what the AG was saying from the outset, that this was a case of human error? Answer, they were too ashamed of themselves at the time.
That's why I'm saying now that clearly, my party agrees with those responses because they now saying they will withhold support on special majority bills. 

In doing so they're doing the same thing they did when they repeal the law, RETROACTIVELY admitting they were sleeping when the bill was being discussed in parliament! 

Now they are going to all sorts of foolish extremes trying to redeem themselves! Opportunistic, pathetic, too late, is what I call it, so it won't fool anybody, certainly not me!
Octavia Crichlow | Upper Ojoe Road, Sangre Grande

No comments:

Jai & Sero

Jai & Sero

Our family at home in Toronto 2008

Our family at home in Toronto 2008
Amit, Heather, Fuzz, Aj, Jiv, Shiva, Rampa, Sero, Jai