Now that the time has arrived for the dissolution of Parliament, it is useful to note that the 10th Republican Parliament is the only one that has gone the full distance from start to finish once it is dissolved on June 17 instant. Having been opened on June 18, 2010, the only other Parliament to go the full distance was the 1971-76 Parliament which assembled on June 18, 1971, after the general election of May 24, 1971.
Interestingly, that Parliament actually met on June 18, 1976, and there was some measure of controversy, at the time, about whether such a sitting ought to have taken place. Both Dr Williams, the prime minister, and the attorney general, Basil Pitt, were of the view that there was no problem and so the House met on that day and transacted parliamentary business.
The phenomenon of calling a general election before a Parliament has entered its fifth year has happened in the 1991-95, 2001, 2002 and the 2007-2010 Parliaments. In 1995 and in 2010, the prime minister, Patrick Manning, decided to call an early general election well ahead of the due date and on both occasions he lost. In 2001, prime minister Basdeo Panday had no choice but to call an early general election after ten months in office owing to the fact that three of his party’s MPs, Ramesh Maharaj, Ralph Maraj and Trevor Sudama switched their support from him to the leader of the Opposition, Patrick Manning.
The 2002 case is a most unique one whereby the general election of December 10, 2001, ended in an 18-18 tie and Patrick Manning was appointed prime minister. Owing to the tied result, the Parliament that was summoned on April 5, 2002, was never able to elect a Speaker. On August 28, 2002, prime minister Manning advised a dissolution and a general election was held on October 7, 2002, with Parliament opening on October 17, 2002.
Needless to say, very little time was left to pass a budget which had to be done by October 31 and Parliament was able to accomplish this inside the time frame for completion of the process. With a September 7 election this year, there is no fear that whoever is elected can complete the budget process which has already started as is customary at this time of year.
What the minister of finance, whoever that is in September, will have to do is to settle on matters of fiscal policy.
Last week, there was a most surprising outburst about the workload for senators from some independent senators. This came like a bolt from the blue and for those who are not au courant with the cycles of parliamentary workloads, it will be useful to provide some statistics about the natural increase in workloads towards the end of a parliamentary term.
The two Parliaments in recent times that have gone into their fifth year would be the 1995-2000 and 2002-2007 Parliaments. The statistics reveal that in the 1995-2000 Parliament, in the final month before dissolution on November 2, 2000, there were ten sittings of the House of Representatives between October 2 and 30, while there were seven sittings of the Senate between October 3 and 31, 2000.
In respect of the 2002-2007 Parliament, the statistics show that in the final month before dissolution on September 28, 2007, there were six sittings of the House of Representatives between September 10 and 28, while there were nine sittings of the Senate between September 3 and 27, 2007.
When compared to the final month before the end of this Parliament, the number of sittings of the Senate between May 12 and June 10 was eight, while the number of sittings of the House of Representatives listed between May 13 and June 12 was nine.
This workload is no different than was the case in the 1995-2000 Parliament controlled by the UNC or the 2002-2007 Parliament controlled by the PNM. So why all the whingeing and whining by some independent senators? If they cannot handle the natural workload that will escalate at the end of any Parliament that goes into a fifth year, then maybe the President should be looking elsewhere for people to sit on the independent benches who can deal with heavy parliamentary workloads in addressing the people’s business. One of the factors that assisted the Government towards the end of this Parliament was the decision by the Opposition PNM to stay away from the House with the exception of May 22, June 5 and June 12.
That certainly allowed the Government the opportunity to press ahead with more legislation in the House because of the increased time available because of the absence of PNM spokesmen. The most glaring let-off for the Government was the inability of any Opposition MP to file any questions for Prime Minister’s Question Time two Fridays ago when both the PNM and the ILP were present. They let the Prime Minister off the hook and one wonders why, as it was the last Prime Minister’s Question Time before the dissolution.