There is a long established convention in the Parliament that members of one chamber in general do not comment on the goings-on in another chamber, Independent bench elder Dr Dhanayshar Mahabir has said.
He yesterday declined to address criticism by Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley, who on Wednesday accused Independent senators of “organising themselves as a political party” to obstruct Government progress on the recent Strategic Services Agency (amendment) bill.
Seven of the nine Independents vetoed the bill while Independent Hugh Roach and temporary Independent Justin Junkere supported it towards passage. Rowley also took issue with recent statements by Mahabir.
Rowley said Government had gone to Parliament to amend the SSA bill to give security agencies a better vantage point to respond to crime and “...we have Independent senators who are free to be independent but organising themselves as a political party in the Parliament to obstruct the Government’s progress.”
On Government’s privileges motion against temporary UNC Senator Gerald Ramdeen, and claims that Mahabir said any motion “should have come” from the Independent bench since the issue involved Independent Junkere, the PM had said it wasn’t for Mahabir to tell Government senators what they should and shouldn’t do. He said he didn’t know where an Independent senator “would have got it from, to say it should have been done by any particular person..”
Rowley added if Independents were inclined to raise the matter, he’d have expected Mahabir would have been in the forefront of filing the motion.
The Independent bench under regulations has no leader. But Mahabir, who is the longest serving member, is regarded as an elder and sometimes does administrative chores, but doesn’t “lead” the bench since it involves members who are independent of each other.
Contacted on the PM’s criticisms, Mahabir said: “In the Parliament, the long established convention of members of one chamber—Lower House or Senate—not commenting on the goings-on in the other chamber isn’t written, but is practice of many years.
“Even in our chamber, when we have to refer to Hansard reports from the House of Representatives, the Senate President usually informs us that we need to be on point and cannot refer in any extended way to it and to move on. Given that that convention is in existence, and I respect all Parliament conventions, I cannot at all comment on what a member of another chamber has said about the members on the Independent bench in the Senate.”
Mahabir added, “If people wish to break with Parliament tradition, they have a right to do so and exercise freedom of speech as mandated in the Constitution.
“But I, for one, am a stickler for convention...We have come to develop a certain code that says in a debate that we’re all being very courteous to each other.
I love Parliamentary convention, as it sets standards for civil behaviour and creation of a truly civil society—and because I respect our Parliamentary convention, I hope you understand why I will not comment on the statements by a member from the House of Representatives.”