( L - R ) Phillips and Smith

Edmond Campbell, Senior News Coordinator

There was sharp disagreement in the House of Representatives on Tuesday between parliamentary leaders whose description of the just-concluded legislative year varied from "good" to "very bad".

Bringing the curtains down on the 2006/2007 parliamentary year in Gordon House, Leader of Government Business, Dr. Peter Phillips, described the legislative year as good, pointing out that several important pieces of legislation were passed by the House.

He listed the ICC Cricket World Cup West Indies Act 2007, The Electoral Commission Act, The Electronic Transaction Act, Trafficking in Persons Act, Interception of Communications Act, National Commission on Science and Technology and the Proceeds of Crimes Act, among the key bills passed.

Dr. Phillips told his colleagues that members on the government side answered numerous questions satisfactorily, as he made his closing remarks before the prorogation of Parliament.

However, in a swift response, Leader of Opposition Business, Derrick Smith, challenged Dr. Phillips' claim that the parliamentary year was good, declaring that it was "very bad".

Small number of debates

According to Mr. Smith, Opposition members tabled 22 private members' motions, which were not debated. In fact, of the 37 private members' motion slated for debate only six were debated.

At least 23 pieces of legislation were debated and passed by the Lower House.

The Leader of Opposition Business complained that a number of committees, including Infrastructure and Physical Development, did not meet throughout the parliamentary year.

"For the entire year the Appropriations Committee did not meet, the Economy and Production Committee did not meet, so the point I am making is that the Opposition could not sit here and agree with the Government that it has been a good parliamentary year," Smith maintained.

However, he conceded that in relation to questions, members on the government side responded favourably.

In his reply, Dr. Phillips said the Government wanted to debate many more bills and private members' motions, but was faced with time constraints. He said that debates on resolutions sometimes extend for hours, making it difficult for the House to deal with other business.

"I have pleaded on many occasions, let us bring some structure to the debate, every Parliament in the world does it, it hasn't been done," Phillips contended.

He invited his colleagues to agree on a structured approach to debates in the new parliamentary year.