PNM MPs: Opposition doing its job at SFC

Speaker Jagdeo Singh. - File photo

OPPOSITION Chief Whip Marvin Gonzales and Port of Spain North/St Ann's West MP Stuart Young disagreed with Leader of Government Business Barry Padarath that a meeting of the Standing Finance Committee of the House of Representatives on October 21 was abysmal because the opposition was questioning the government about the 2025/2026 budget.

Gonzales made this point at the start of the committee's meeting at the Red House on October 22, to continue its budget deliberations. The committee began its budget deliberations on October 21.

Speaker Jagdeo Singh began the meeting with an admission.

"We performed very, very poorly. I dare say abysmally on our time management yesterday."

Singh said, "Whilst I understand that it is important that members be allowed to freely ask questions to elicit vital information, I think we have to strike a delicate and proportionate balance with the management of time."

He added out of nine heads of expenditure before the committee on October 21, only four were examined.

Singh made an appeal to the government and opposition.

"Let us work in a collaborative manner and make some attempt to move along in a reasonable, proportionate manner."

Singh asked, "Can I respectfully suggest that a lot of the questions that we have, some of it can be obtained in writing?"

He reminded MPs that Opposition Leader Pennelope Beckles requested the majority of the questions she asked the government to be submitted to her in writing. Singh recalled Beckles contextualised her questions before making these requests.

Singh suggested, "That is perhaps an example that we can follow."

Padarath said the government was blameless in what happened in the meeting on October 21.

"The travesty that occurred falls squarely at the feet of the opposition."

Padarath repeated what happened on October 21 "had nothing to do with the government in terms of time management and the way in which the committee was conducted."

Gonzales and Young objected to this statement.

Young said, "Who is in control of providing truthful answers, direct answers to questions and what the people have us here for which is to provide illumination on mere figures is the government."

He added, "What we saw yesterday was not even an artful dodging but just a plain boldface refusal on many occasions not to answer the questions being asked."

Singh said, "That is water under the proverbial bridge. Let's move forward with a conciliatory spirit."

Gonzales, who is also PNM chairman, acknowledged Singh's wish for a conciliatory approach to the day's proceedings. He promised the opposition would do what it could to ensure the committee completed its work for the five days allotted to it under the House's standing orders to examine the budget.

The committee is scheduled to complete the exercise by October 25.

But Gonzales supported Young's view.

"The opposition did its work fearlessly."

In a Facebook post on October 22, Beckles endorsed that view. She said the PNM would continue to do so when the meeting resumed later in the day.

The committee approved expenditures for the Public Service Appeal Board, Environmental Commission and Statutory Service Commission without incident.

During the committee's meeting on October 21, government and opposition MPs engaged in a tit-for-tat for four hours over questions by the former to the latter about the National Recruitment Drive, vacancies at the Social Development Ministry and their respective political histories.

This scenario played out before the committee approved a budgetary allocation of $6,012,215,208 for the ministry.