Gov’t still unable to say who will select NRF board directors
of 2019. Since being published the criticisms have been heavy and the government’s seeming need to rush its passage has raised questions.
The Opposition and some civil society organisations had been calling for it to be sent to a special select committee so as to facilitate greater involvement of the public which would result in a bill that received bipartisan support. However, this call was ignored.
When questioned by Stabroek News yesterday as to why the bill was not deferred, the Finance Minister again evaded the question by stating that the Parliamentary procedures relating to the submission and consideration of bills were followed by the government and that the Opposition had ample time to submit amendments.
“It was before the House for a good two weeks and first of all the Standing Orders of the Parliament which prescribe the number of days between the first and second and third reading of a bill, those Standing Orders were fully complied with.
“This bill didn’t represent a completely brand new piece of legislation comprising 40 or 50 completely new clauses. This is actually a bill that replicated more than almost half the previous bill (passed by the APNU+AFC),” Singh said.
He added that the government was keen to retain certain parts of the existing NRF Act of 2019 though it did find them lacking.
“Where there are elements of the bill that we felt could be made operable and operational without causing great harm we tried to retain that provision. If you put the bill and the Act side by side you would see more than 20 clauses are an exact replication of the APNU+AFC’s Act and that is not by accident,” Singh added.
He further contended, without addressing the rushing of the bill through the House amid Wednesday night’s chaos, that the amendments were straightforward and if the Opposition wanted to add amendments then they should have submitted their proposals.
“If the APNU+AFC wanted to propose specific amendments for consideration they had the latitude so to do and they didn’t. They did propose amendments to the Local Content Bill…they didn’t propose a single amendment to the Natural Resource Fund bill and they didn’t proffer a single valid reason what their objection to this bill are except simply to say that they wanted to refer it to the special select committee,” the Finance Minister argued.
He accused the Opposition of having no plan except to delay, frustrate and derail the enactment of the NRF bill and Local Content bill.
“Notwithstanding that, they didn’t table a single amendment in relation to the Natural Resource Fund bill, they didn’t have a single suggestion what they wanted to be changed except that they wanted it to be delayed. So there is no doubt in the minds of any right-thinking person that their intent was to simply postpone, delay and ultimately derail the enactment of these two bills and therefore ultimately deny the Guyanese people the benefit that would flow from these two pieces of legislation,” Singh continued.
He was joined by his Cabinet colleagues Minister of Natural Resources Vickram Bharrat, Minister of Tourism, Industry and Commerce, Oneidge Walrond, Parliamentary Affairs and Governance Minister Gail Teixeira and Sports Minister Charles Ramson Jr.
They all sought to attack the Opposition and civil society organisations for criticizing their actions. Bharrat questioned the organisations’ membership while Ramson accused them of having no credibility and of being politically aligned. They also questioned the relative silence from the organisations during the years of the APNU+AFC government.
Observers noted that the NRF bill was tabled sixteen months after the government entered office in August 2020 and there was a brief interval before the second reading and no period set aside for consultations.