By Anthony Milne
Saturday 29th March, 2008
Pandemonium broke out in the Lower House yesterday as Speaker Barendra Sinanan suspended Opposition Leader Basdeo Panday for using his laptop without permission.
The Speaker relied on Standing Order 43 (12) to suspend Panday and the sitting ended at 2.15 pm, 45 minutes after it started.
Following the order paper, government ministers answered questions and then it was time for debate on a private motion on rising food prices brought by Naparima MP Nizam Baksh.
Sinanan said: “Before I put the question, I wish to remind members of a circular I gave on February 25, concerning the use of electronic devices.
“I also wish to remind you of the rule that for the use of such technology, members must seek the permission of the Speaker before using such devices during debate,” he added.
An Opposition member shouted: “A backward approach!”
The Speaker continued: “Secondly, if permission is granted, use must be confined to refreshing one’s mind or seeking notes or making amendments to notes during debate, and the member must intend to respond on the date for which permission was sought.”
He had noticed that the Couva North MP Panday had a laptop computer on his desk.
“Hon Member for Couva North, are you contributing to the debate before this House today?” the Speaker asked.
Panday looked away and remained silent, as crosstalk rose.
“If he is not contributing to the debate today, and he has not asked permission to use his computer for the purpose of contributing to the debate today, I am asking him to put away the computer,” the Speaker declared.
Full Article : guardian.co.tt
Related News:
Sunday, March 30th 2008
Panday says he’s prepared for jail
OPPOSITION LEADER, Basdeo Panday, said that after a good night’s sleep, he feels that he has a lot of work to do to preserve the democracy in Trinidad and Tobago following his parliamentary suspension on Friday. He told Sunday Newsday, yesterday: “I do not feel any different about Friday. If anyone feels any differently, they are still in mental slavery by the People’s National Movement. People do not realise what is going on.”
Former speakers weigh in on Panday suspension
PM: We won’t save Panday
Government is not prepared to encourage the importing of lawlessness into the Parliament, through the Leader of the Opposition, Prime Minister Patrick Manning said yesterday. And therefore his Government will not validate Basdeo Panday’s behaviour last Friday by initiating or supporting a resolution overturning his suspension from the Parliament, the Prime Minister added. Manning said the lawlessness manifested itself in Panday’s refusal to accept the authority of the Speaker.
Clear case of disrespect
Newspaper headlines claim that Mr Panday was suspended from Parliament “for using laptop.” This is misleading. He was suspended for persistently refusing to obey the Speaker: he wilfully disregarded the chair’s authority.
Saturday, March 29th 2008
Bas Suspended from Parliament for using laptop
Opposition Leader Basdeo Panday has been suspended from Parliament for the remainder of the session, which can extend until December 16, 2008, House Speaker Barry Sinanan confirmed yesterday.
Opposition MPs plan to buck the Speaker
The rift continues to widen between Opposition Leader Basdeo Panday and Speaker of the House of Representatives Barendra Sinanan in the aftermath of Panday’s suspension from yesterday’s sitting…
‘Shame’ in the House
The Parliament Chamber was a scene of turmoil yesterday as tempers flared, insults were hurled and the police force was ordered to remove Opposition Leader Basdeo Panday over his use of a laptop.
Bas vows to return
House Speaker Barry Sinanan will have to expel all 15 UNC members of Parliament because they are all coming with the laptops at the next sitting.
MPs have been allowed to bring mobile telephones, BlackBerrys and laptop computers into the Canadian Commons for a number of years.
Since December 2004, when the Canadian chamber received a number of technological upgrades, MPs have had access to wireless Internet. Unlike many work environments, however, there are no restrictions placed on what websites politicians can look at.
This Panday story has been carried by the Canadian Press and other international news organizations.It is being discussed with disbelief and amusement.The rules of the Speaker seem quite regressive and uninformed. This does not excuse Mr. Panday however, for his defiant behavior. He should have advocated many years ago for the technological modernization of the Parliament.
The whole fiasco makes T&T appear quite archaic. One would think that a nation bent on the pursuit of first world status by 2020 would have welcomed technological advances.
One also wonders if the arrogant attitude of the Speaker and the uncompromising reaction of the government characterize the manner in which institutions operate in Trinidad and tobago.
Mr. Carl Rampersad’s comments usually make sense. Speaking as he has on this issue, and comenting from Canada, his comments lack relevance most of the way. Trinidad and Tobago is not archaic when it comes to Parliamentary Procedure, and the rules of the house. The speaker clearly asked whether Mr.Panday planned to speak on the motion before the house. He did not say he was so intending.
Mr.Panday’s continuing disrespect for the house he struggled so hard to get back into, going all the way to the Privy Council, then begging the electorate to give him one more chance should make TnT a laughing stock in that his foolish constituency elected him to be the tantrum thrower- a three year old child-in the respected house of the legislature.
I have long maintained that alcohol kills brain cells, and they do not regenerate. If Mr. Panday needs assistance with a laptop or other device, all he had to do was ask the speaker’s permission. Perhaps he had typed some notes at home in some of his more lucid moments, and wanted to recall them, all he had to do was ask, but asking was the problem because Panday sees himself as a law unto himself, and not subject to the laws of any state, committee or even of humanity as a whole.
This is the issue here: Is such a person to be allowed to disrupt the running of the people’s business, ad infinitum ad nauseam?
Each group and organization has the right to create house rules for its good governance. Becoming a member of such a group means accepting the rules as given, until such time as one can move a motion, and get enough support, to change those rules.
Mr.Panday’s pettiness in continuing to defy the speaker, and trying to reduce the honorable house to fistfights as has happened in India and Nepal and other eastern parliaments in recent times, is beneath contempt. There is no defending him.
This is another attempt to distract the government from its business, waste taxpayers money, and get paid for not working. The computer should have been siezed so that the whole world could know what he was working on, while pretending to do the people’s business.
I hope he knows that the minute he sues, the computer will become evidence.I hope he knows enough computerese to know he cannot permanently erase what he was working on.
“Trinidad and Tobago is not archaic when it comes to Parliamentary Procedure, and the rules of the house”
I totally agree with Linda Edwards, however I was not questioning Parliamentary procedure or the rules of the House,I was simply suggesting that in any Parliament, legislators should be trusted with the responsible use of laptops and other technological devices which improve their performances.
I guess Linda is suggesting that legislators in the context of T&T are not mature and responsible enough to properly utilize such technologies to conduct the people’s business.
What is unfortunate here is once again the House is embroiled in an issue which distracts from the important business of the people. And once again the Opposition is preparing to go to war on this issue while missing the mark on much more relevant issues.
Mr. Rampersad, rules are rules. If the Government (PNM/UNC-A) believes a change needs to be made, then go through the proper channels and make the change.
You said “Since December 2004, when the Canadian chamber received a number of technological upgrades, MPs have had access to wireless Internet. Unlike many work environments, however, there are no restrictions placed on what websites politicians can look at.” That is good for them.
“The whole fiasco makes T&T appear quite archaic” That appearance, if true, maybe because people are not looking at the true picture. Most people are looking at the headlines that a writer made up to capture a sensational headline/story. It does not make T&T backwards or immature. The USA government does not allow electronic devices in their sittings. So is the US government archaic or do they think the Senators and Representatives are immature or irresponsible? Electronic devices are allowed with permission only.
The issue at hand is that Pandy has no respect for anyone in authority and if he is not chief, then no one can tell him anything.
“One also wonders if the arrogant attitude of the Speaker and the uncompromising reaction of the government characterize the manner in which institutions operate in Trinidad and Tobago” To turn around and lay blame on the Speaker who is in charge of the HOUSE during sittings and the PNM is absolute nonsense. When you make rules in YOUR house and they are not followed, do you consider yourself arrogant for enforcing them or questioning the person for breaking them? Do you turn around and blame your wife or any other person that followed the rules for supporting you? This is the same nonsense why the crime situation in T&T is the way it is. We cover up bad behavior and blame others. We always find a way to justify someone’s wrong, even if it is ever so slight.
He was WRONG point blank. He was DISRESPECTFUL point blank. He was RIGHTFULLY suspended point blank. We as a people need to take responsibility for our actions and inactions. TELL IT AS IT IS. If you wrong, you are wrong, if you are right, you are right, stop making excuses for bad behavior. Everyone needs to do the right thing at all times. NUFF SAID
I believe the comparison that need to be made with Canada is at the level of tolerance for disrespect given to the position of Speaker of the House. The fact that certain electronic devices are allowed use in the Canadian Parliament does not make the actions of the Speaker of the Trinidad House repressive. What stands out poignantly in this affair is the childish arrogance displayed by the leader of the opposition to the Speaker’s attempts to enforce the rules of the house. And I suspect that those removed from affiliations in T&T, whether they be in Canada and elsewhere, when they look at this will be more stunned at the adoloscent attitude and behaviour of Basdeo Panday, than they are over the lateness of the T&T house in catching up with the technological developments of the first world.
I can agree that the development of Technology require some tweaking of the rules of the T&T Parliament. I believe that members should have access to things like lap tops during debates, since being able to refresh their memories and the like can only enhance the level of the debate on issues crucial to the interest of the nation. But that is not the point in issue, and it requires a great leap of context to take it there. The point in issue is the Honourable MP of COUVA NORTH’s parliamentary indiscipline, which loudly suggests that he should be exempted from adherence to the rules of the house. I wonder if he would tolerate a similar tone of indiscipline behaviour from his kids or grand-kids.
This entire debacle is disgusting. Panday obviously does not like to play by the rules if he does not agree with them. A rule was set and if you want to be part of the House you have to go by its rules. You can’t play in the World Cup and want to disregard the off-side rule because you don’t like it.
That being said…the rule regarding the use of the laptop is so foolish, only a technologically incompetent and backward thinking person would agree with it. Why walk to parliament with a stack of documents when it can all be carried in the laptop? A computer can provide easy reference material so as Panday said, can be used to cross reference what another person is saying in real time. I have seen members of both sides reading Time and other magazines or sleeping or talking amongst themselves while proceedings are going on. How is the laptop any more distracting that that…assuming the person on the laptop isn’t listening to MP3s or playing World of Warcraft.
Of course some people will jump on this opportunity to rip apart Panday and I can’t blame them because Panday continuously sets himself up for this with his child like behaviour. However I fail to see the relevance of accusing him of being perpetually drunk and having rear lucid moments. Calling his constituents foolish goes one step further and insults people who know that they can get more (however little that may be) out of him than another representative – kind of like the people of Lavantille always voting PNM despite little to no improvement in their standards of living over the last few years. As a side note, for Linda’s information, YES, you CAN permanently delete information from a laptop….that statement shows that you do not know as much as you think you do about technology so maybe that’s why you would tend to agree with the rule about laptops. Maybe you know less about aircraft that that is why you choose to remain silent on that topic…I hope so and not because in your eyes like so many others, the PNM can do no wrong.
A Dictionry for Riaz- foolish according to Oxford Standard, means lacking in good judgment, ridiculous.
Inasmuch, therefore as the constituents of Couva North had enough prior information about Basdeo Panday’s tantrum throwing, calling derogatory names, belittling others and his corruption situation that has been set aside but not completely cleared, inasmuch as he had begged to be re-sent to the house so he could go out”in a laze of Glory,” and hs constituents ignored all the evidence to send him back, they were acting foolishly- without good judgment, ridiculously.
Now what “plane were we talking about here? Has Panday flown somewhee?
I live in a technologically advanced society.
I am required to turn off my phone in church, at the movies, at concert halls, in the courts, even while participating in a marriage.
Laptops are not allowed in a number of places.\Cameras are not allowed in some exhibits of museums- and, you can comply or stay home.
Societies without rules are savage societies.
Now, when I applied to be a citizen of the country I now live in, in the 70’s, one of the questions on the form was: Have you ever committed adultery?
I found the question totally offensie, but it was there and all would be citizens had to and=swer it. Later, partly due to protests by various people, the offensive question was removed.
Society is run by rules everywhere in the world. Mr. Dookeran, in his comments in the Express today, used the word foolish also. I find the rule of backing off from the British Monarch foolish, and so, if I was invited to meet the queen, I would not go. I do not walk well backwards.
Foolish rules are someone else’s rules that intemperate, petulant people do not want to follow, but a want to be in the setting anyway.
Panday has no intention of casually playing by any rules, especially now when he knows that if he waits for the next general election he may be too old to be considered for leadership of this country. He would use every opportunity to fan the flames of descent. He has it in for the House Speaker and did not want to yield to his authority. It is not that Panday was suspended because of the laptop, but more accurately, for failing to comply with the instructions of the House Speaker.
The bigger issue here shows what is wrong with Trinidad and Tobago. It appears that once some people support a political party the only wrongs they see or are willing to publicly speak about are wrongs done by other parties. They give the impression that their party can do no wrong.
Panday was obviously wrong and I saw a comment similar to what Ruel spoke about as “’a piling on’ by elements rabidly antipathetic to the object of their derision” being directed to him. I am sure that some people who support the PNM would have no problem with that. When a similar line and tone is used in respect to Patrick Manning, some PNM supporters feel that the posters are being excessive and personal. People’s emotions are obviously not tied to the truth but to political parties, and truths are twisted to suit political agendas.
This is exactly the reason there would not be consensus on how to address serious problems in Trinidad and Tobago.
I spoke about piling on in repect of the comments that the ceremonial head of Trinidad and Tobago should give detailed descriptions of the solutions to crime. There is a great distinction between the enmity that was transparently obvious in that thread, and my response to Panday’s faux pas. The issue was not between Panday and the PNM. The issue was Panday’s disrespect for the people’s house.
Still, regardless of where one comes down, my central point is being made here. To wit, that regardless of claims of objectivity of most of us, ethnicity rules when it comes down to the nitty gritty. Because it cannot be by mere act of happenstance that the opinions always seem to come down along the lines they do. The difference is that others are not prepared to look inwards, but believe that they can still p-lay the game. Examination of the trend suggest that the whistle has been blown eons ago.