PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad – Two of the most senior politicians from the main opposition People’s National Movement (PNM), including former prime minister Patrick Manning, are now in a battle to save their political careers.
Manning faces the possibility of expulsion from the Parliament after he was found guilty of contempt of Parliament by the Privileges Committee, while Opposition Leader DrKeith Rowlrey has been sent to the Privileges Committee after the Speaker, Wade Mark, agreed that a case had been against the opposition legislator over remarks he made concerning the Attorney General, Anand Ramlogan.
The Parliament is expected to meet on Monday to discuss the report about Manning and to determine what penalties should be imposed against him.
Under the parliamentary rules, Manning could be suspended, or reprimanded or made to apologise or he could even be expelled. The Government controls 29 seats in the 41 seats in Parliament.
Manning was sent to the Privileges Committee following allegations he made in relation to the acquisition of funding for the construction of the private residence of Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar. He had accused her Government of carrying out the agenda of those who financed them in the election campaign, those “who were involved in the drug trade”.
Charging that Government was undermining the anti-drug effort put in place by his administration, Manning had said the private residence cost TT$150 million (US$25 million) telling legislators “to what conclusion do you expect us to come? They were struggling to build that house before the election”.
The Prime Minister denied the accusation and the Committee, which tabled its report during yesterday’s parliamentary sitting, stated that despite having invited the former prime minister to appear before it to answer the allegations against him and to be heard on numerous occasions, “the Member has refused to respond to the allegations before the Committee and has requested adjournments of the Committee’s proceedings for a variety of reasons”.
The Committee said it exercised “tremendous patience and forbearance” in accommodating Manning, the longest serving parliamentarian and his multiple requests for adjournments of the Committee’s proceedings with respect to this matter.
It said it believed that it had done everything in its power to ensure that he was fully apprised of the allegations made against him and to give him an opportunity to be heard.
“Members felt it was most regrettable that the Committee was limited to deliberating on the verbatim notes of Manning’s contribution and the personal explanation given by the Prime Minister, without the benefit of hearing from Manning. It accused Manning of “frustrating the Committee’s efforts to proceed with its business with expedition”.
The Committee said Manning made very serious allegations against the conduct of Members of the House, “without in any way supporting such claims”.
It noted that Manning’s contribution was “not an off-the-cuff one” and that he was cautioned by the Speaker about imputing improper motives. His response to this was to “serve notice” that he would file a substantive motion but to date, this was not done.
The Committee also took note of the fact that Manning refused to apologise after having heard the personal explanation of the Prime Minister in which she produced documents to refute his allegations.
It also pointed out that Manning as a former prime minister and Chairman of the National Security Council, “would have been privy to very sensitive and confidential information on security matters and as such his accusations would carry weight”.
The Committee, apart from finding Manning in contempt of Parliament, said his absences, attitude and responses to the Committee also suggested contempt for the Committee.
But Opposition Leader Rowley accused the government of using its majority to “bulldoze” a report to the Parliament and it was the first time he had ever seen a report from the Privileges Committee signed by its chairman, who is also the Speaker of Parliament.
He said the three opposition members on the Committee had had objected to the findings and the Committee’s report did not show that there existed a “strong minority objection”.
Rowley said the Parliament which debates the report on Monday would be a “kangaroo court”, given the fact that the contempt finding violated all the rules and procedures.
Meanwhile, Manning has filed a constitutional motion in the High Court to allow his attorney to represent him before the Privileges Committee and the issue is due to be heard on Tuesday.
Rowley was sent to the Privileges Committee after Works and Transport Minister Jack Warner brought a motion accusing him of deliberating misleading the House, of reflecting on the character and conduct of the Ramlogan in such a manner as is likely to bring the House and the Attorney General’s office into ridicule and odium.
Last month, Rowley had told Parliament that he had visited the Trinidad and Tobago mission last November and was told by the staff that Ramlogan also visited the mission and was only interested in its ethnic composition.
Rowley alleged that Ramlogan “made comments openly to the staff about the ethnic composition, and raised questions about the need to fix it”.
But Warner then had informed the Parliament that Ramlogan’s itinerary showed that he had never been in New York.
Warner also quoted a letter, signed by Nireen Jasper, Foreign Service Officer 11, to the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which stated that neither the Attorney General, nor the Leader of the Opposition visited the Consulate General in New York or met with members of staff at the Consulate during his tenure April 28, 2010 to May 9, 2011.
Rowley later told reporters he was not fearful of going before the Committee.
“I have no fear of the Privileges Committee. I am a responsible member of Parliament,” he said. (CMC)
