A bid by Bermuda’s Opposition Progressive Labour Party to form a parliamentary committee on immigration reform was torpedoed by the governing One Bermuda Alliance last night.
The PLP asked parliament to set up a joint select committee to “develop a set of proposals for substantial reform of immigration policy” warning that anything less than a consensus approach would further divide the country.
But proceedings descended into pandemonium when House of Assembly Speaker Randolph Horton accepted an OBA proposed amendment to the motion and ruled that the amendment need not be debated.
The PLP disagreed and left the chamber en masse after Horton ordered David Burt, the party’s Deputy Leader, removed from the House of Assembly when he rose on a question of privilege.
In a tactic commonly employed by governing parties when an Opposition party tables a substantive motion, the One Bermuda Alliance sought to water down the PLP motion by converting it to a “take note” motion which would have led to a discussion with no requirement on the part of the government to act.
Under the Westminster parliamentary system, Joint Select committees are dominated by the governing party but normally chaired by the MP who proposes it.
Shadow Immigration Minister Walton Brown who introduced the PLP motion told the House that his proposed committee’s reform proposals would require consent from at least two thirds of its members – to ensure cross party support – and that it would have the power to summon witnesses and take evidence under oath. Brown said the committee would need access to quality data in order to achieve its objectives.
The OBA’s amendment, proposed by Attorney General Trevor Moniz, was that the parliament “take note of immigration policy and the need to consider continuing reform of such policy.”
Horton called for a vote on the proposed amendment, but Opposition members were of the view that the amendment to the motion was a “direct negative” to the original motion and should not be allowed and, in any case, had to be debated before being voted upon.
That motion is inadmissible because it fundamentally changes the essence of the motion,” said Brown.
Burt argued that, according to the rules known as Standing Orders, the amendment motion had to be debated before being voted upon.
He then asked the Speaker to point to the rule that allowed him to forego a debate on the amendment motion.
Despite being unable to tell the House what rule he relied on to prevent debate on the amendment motion, Horton disagreed on both points and allowed the Attorney General to move his amendment.
Burt, who had already been prevented by the Speaker from raising a point of order on two occasions, rose again on a question of privilege. Horton became irate and ordered him removed from the House, prompting an exodus by the PLP members.
“We are parliamentarians, we’re just trying to get clarity on the law,” protested Marc Bean.
My deputy has not done anything wrong for him to be removed from the House. If that’s the case we are all going. The House is in disrepute, Mr Speaker. You are allowing the Government to manipulate this House, so we are going home.”
With the Opposition members out of the chamber, the amended motion was not debated and it was passed unopposed.
“Its disappointing,” Horton said of the PLP walkout shortly after the House chamber had cleared of MPs. “While I agree that they may not have agreed with me, I feel comfortable that the decision was made as per the Standing Orders.”
I stood on a question of privilege which is a right afforded to all members of parliament,” said Burt.
“And the Speaker refused to acknowledge my question of privilege. Its not something that he has the right to do. He has to acknowledge a member who rises to his feet in parliament. He cannot say ‘no, Honourable Member I am not going to listen to what you have to say’. That is completely 100 percent and totally out of order. I have a right to stand up and I have a right to speak. If not, what’s the point of me being here?”
He stressed that he and Horton enjoyed friendly relations.
I have no personal issue with the Speaker. I have an issue when he does not understand the rules of parliament which is necessary for him to do his job.
It is a basic and fundamental understanding of parliament that when a motion is put to the floor that motion is to be debated. And the fact that he had a vote on a motion today which substantially altered the substantive motion without allowing any debate on that motion is unconscionable.
It was not in the rules. He was wrong, and he would not hear a point of order”
Standing Orders specify parliamentary procedure including how motions are to be handled.
Standing order 21 (2) (b) reads:
(b) On motion being made and, where necessary seconded, the Speaker shall propose the question to the House and after debate, if any, shall then put the question for the decision of the House;
Asked whether it all could have all been a communication error, Burt responded:
It doesn’t matter if it was a communication error if the Speaker had done his basic responsibility which is to recognise a member when he stands on a point of order which he refused to do.
What’s even more shameful is that the One Bermuda Alliance sat there silently while the Speaker ran over democracy. They should know better because there are people on their side who were in opposition once, who understand the necessity for a proper functioning democracy for the rights of minorities to be respected and for the rights of the minority to be heard.
Yes they had the votes, yes the motion would have been carried. But at the end of the day it doesn’t mean we should not have the right to speak on that amendment.”
The One Bermuda Alliance take on events was summarised in this tweet yesterday evening.
Opposition PLP walked out of legislature when Speaker Horton rules to expand immigration debate.
This article belongs to Politica ! The original article can be found here: Bermuda: Immigration reform motion sinks
Politica © 2024 - All Rights Reserved
[…] Much of the time allotted for debating the PLP’s motion was taken up in increasingly tense discussion over parliamentary procedure before the PLP walked out of parliament (see story here). […]