Friday, August 9, 2013
By DANA
SMITH
Tribune Staff Reporter
dsmith@tribunemedia.net
CRITICISING the actions of Speaker Kendal Major as “wrong”, DNA Leader Branville McCartney questioned how a comment can be withdrawn in the House of Assembly if it was already expunged from the record.
On Wednesday, police attempted to forcibly remove FNM leader Dr Hubert Minnis from the House after he was named by the Speaker and banned for two sittings for refusing to withdraw comments regarding alleged PLP links with multi-millionaire fashion designer Peter Nygard.
Mr McCartney, former Bamboo Town MP, called the situation “unfortunate” and questioned the actions of Dr Major.
“The naming of the leader of the opposition is questionable whether or not the Speaker went about it the right way,” he said. “I understand the words used by Dr Minnis a few weeks back were expunged from the record and as a result, they were no longer there.
“By expunging, it means it’s at an end, it’s no longer there. But yet the Speaker was still asking Dr Minnis to withdraw. You cannot withdraw something that’s no longer there.
“If the Speaker really wanted to take the approach of having Dr Minnis withdraw, he should not have expunged it and he ought to have insisted that Dr Minnis produced evidence to support his statements and if Dr Minnis was unable to do it, then he ought to have named Dr Minnis, if he failed to withdraw.
“But by asking him to withdraw something that the Speaker had already expunged or taken away, I think it was wrong. That’s my view on it.”
Mr McCartney further criticised the matter as drawing focus away from stem cell Bill debate.
“I consider it a very important Bill that ought to have been debated by the government and the opposition,” he said.
“My views, reading the Bill, it could be very good for the Bahamas, it could be very good for the advancement of healthcare, once regulations and guidelines are put in place. Unfortunately, we won’t hear what the opposition has to say.”
Comments
justthefactsplease says...
That was also my question ... why is there a need to withdraw something that was expunged?" It is like shredding a piece of paper that you have already burnt ... utter foolishness in my opinion ... maybe the speaker (or anyone else for that matter) would like to explain how it can be done ... and why it needs to be done.
Posted 9 August 2013, 1:20 p.m. Suggest removal
shakeel says...
Unique comparatively uncomplicated answer to succor exalt scholars choosing main custody would be to acknowledge <a href="www.bestcustomessay.org/">custom writing service</a> a dues conclusion for fascinate paid on learner borrows for main grief.
Posted 12 August 2013, 8:33 a.m. Suggest removal
jcmorgan says...
expunge to strike out,obliterate,toefface completely,or destroy.so my question is if the statement by dr minnis was expunge by the speaker then what does mr minnis have to withdraw,these things have a way of coming back to bite you.as a young speaker in the house i would excourage dr major to read up on parlimentary procedure,and rules of order and don"t show any biasiness in the house,and not allow anyone to presuade you to belittle anyone as long as you are speaker of the house.,
Posted 12 August 2013, 9:45 a.m. Suggest removal
Log in to comment