BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – FOLLOWING on the heels of the five members on the Opposition who boycotted yesterday’s (Dec. 13) 2012 Budget Address, a press release from Charles Jong’s Disseminateit insinuated that they did not deserve the salary they have so far received for 2011, which amounted to some $300 000.
The release, headlined “Government paid $300,000.00 to Brantley, Richards, Hamilton, Amory, and Byron in 2011”, stated that the five Parliamentarians had come under heavy public criticism for failing to maintain a satisfactory attendance record for the Sittings of the National Assembly.
The Hons. Vance Amory, Mark Brantley, Shawn Richards and Eugene Hamilton are elected members while Senator Vincent Byron is an appointed member.
Making an assessment of their attendance in Parliament as against the salaries collected, the release noted: “What the majority of the general public may not have known was that all five of the opposition members collect a salary from the Government of St. Kitts and Nevis and the four elected members also collect a Constituency, Travel, and Entertainment Allowances. But all of the members of the opposition have a poor attendance record for the Sittings of the National Assembly.
The release also asked the question, “Did they work for it?”
“In 2011, the Hon. Mark A. G. Brantley was paid $69,600.00 by the Government and people of St. Kitts and Nevis covering his salary as a Member of Parliament (he collects a higher salary than the other opposition members because he holds the position of Leader of the Opposition) and his allowances. The Hon. Shawn Richards, Eugene Hamilton, and Vance Amory all collected $190,800.00 by the Government and people of St. Kitts and Nevis covering their salaries as Members of Parliament and their allowances. Senator Byron collected $39,600.00 for his salary as an appointed member and his allowances.
“In total, the members of the opposition bench of the St. Kitts and Nevis Federal legislature were paid $300,000.00 by the Government and people of St. Kitts and Nevis for the year 2011,” the release explained.
The writer of the release claimed that both the People’s Action Movement (PAM) and the Concerned Citizens Movement (CCM) had come under heavy criticism for failing to bring a single piece of legislation to the National Assembly, adding that “the general public has complained that all of the energy of the members of the opposition has been spent on submitting questions to the Prime Minister in the legislature to ask him silly questions rather than use their time and energy to draft or debate needed legislation to curb the social challenges that our nation presently faces”.
The writer categorically stated that all the opposition seems to have time and energy for, is to praise and highlight crime and to promote grief.
The release informed that the Opposition’s boycott has fueled calls for the government to revisit its policy in relation to payment of salaries and allowances to members of the opposition who refuse and fail to show up for work.
Meanwhile, a release issued yesterday by Press Secretary of the CCM Mervin Hanley suggested that the five Parliamentarians’ action hinges on the St. Kitts-Nevis government’s obvious intention of preventing the passage of the Integrity in Public Life Bill 2011 into law.
It stated: “Despite the public and private efforts of the Opposition, it has become pellucid that the Dr. Denzil Douglas-led Government of St. Kitts and Nevis will not permit this Bill to be debated in the National Assembly as he and his Government continue to deny our country the necessary mechanisms to fight governmental corruption…
“The members of the Opposition are deeply concerned that some 28 years after St. Kitts and Nevis became an independent country, the necessary statutory mechanisms to prevent Government corruption are still wholly absent. Our country has no Integrity in Public Life legislation, no Freedom of Information legislation and no provisions which could provide a check on governmental corruption. This situation is not in keeping with modern democratic traditions and St. Kitts and Nevis lags badly behind most of its Caribbean neighbours in this regard.”
The release explained that attempts by the Opposition to move the Bill along have been hindered and pieces of communication forwarded by the Opposition went unanswered.
“It was therefore with grave concern and considerable suspicion that we discovered that the Integrity in Public Life Bill would not be tabled at all in Parliament due to parliamentary maneuverings by the sitting Government led by Prime Minister Dr. Denzil Douglas. On the 29th of April, 2011 the Speaker of the Parliament, the Honourable Curtis Martin, refused to allow the Bill to be placed on the Order Paper for reasons that are patently erroneous and contrived. Since that time, the Opposition has tried valiantly to get this matter to the floor of Parliament for debate. Various letters written to the Leader of Government Business in Parliament, the Honourable Sam Condor, seeking to move this matter forward have not even been acknowledged.
“The Opposition wrote to the Honourable Sam Condor on the 25th August, 2011 and on the 17th October 2011 with copies to the Speaker of the Assembly and the other members of Parliament. Both letters raised the issue of Integrity in Public Life and the tabling of this critical piece of legislation in the National Assembly for debate. The letter of 17th October, 2011 also raised the issue of the continued unacceptable vacancy of the position of Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly. Neither letter has to date been acknowledged and several verbal conversations before and since these letters have yielded nothing from the Government side.”
From this backdrop, the Opposition members, as indicated in the release, took the unanimous decision to boycott the Budget Address and the ensuing Debate as they “cannot continue to stand by and permit the affairs of the country to run in the manner in which the Labour/NRP
Government has run them. The lack of transparency and accountability and the refusal of the Government to take sensible steps to instill confidence in the governmental processes demands from the Opposition a firm and unequivocal response.”
