Parliamentary Committee of Privileges merely recommends to Full House

Georgetown : The Parliamentary Committee of Privileges which is the arm of the House responsible for addressing matters of discipline of members can only make recommendations to the Full House.
This is according to the Guyana Government’s Chief Whip, Gail Teixeira, who has been a feature in the National Assembly for more than two decades and arguably one of the most knowledgeable local Parliamentarians on its Standing Orders.
The Parliamentary Standing Orders are the official rules of the House dictating procedure.
This publication at the time of speaking with Teixeira, was seeking clarification on the Parliamentary avenues available to A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) in relation to the most recent furore erupting over statements made by Minister of Agriculture Dr. Leslie Ramsammy.
APNU’s Executive Member with responsibility for the Sugar Industry, Dr. Rupert Roopnaraine had this past week declared that should it be established that the Agriculture Minister did in fact mislead the Parliament of Guyana, then there are mechanisms available to deal with him.
He said that APNU is currently preparing an in-depth dossier of the concerns, related directly to the sugar industry and its officials.
Dr. Roopnaraine said that the party has zeroed in on what appears to be misleading statements to the Parliament.     
But according to Teixeira, the Parliamentary mechanisms available to APNU in relation disciplining any member of the House, remains limited.
She explained that at first, a case has to be made against the Member of Parliament.
This is done by way of a motion presented to the Speaker of the House where the arguments for and against commitment to the Committee of Privileges are made.
The Speaker of the House then decides whether a prima facie case has been made and would rule on whether the particular offending MP should be committed to face what has been described as a ‘Parliamentary Court’.
Even at this level, Teixeira informed, the alternatives are still limited, given that when the case is heard, the Committee would only make a recommendation to the House.
She did point out that the case of completely removing a Member of Parliament cannot be addressed at that level, given that it is the leader of each side of the House who would have to deem no confidence in the Member and have the seat declared empty.
The veteran Parliamentarian reminded this publication of the fact that there are two cases that had been sent to the Parliamentary Committee of Privileges and are yet to be resolved.
She was speaking to the fact that the then Speaker of the House Ralph Ramkarran had committed both Peoples National Congress Reform Member Deborah Backer and Peoples Progressive Party Civic (PPP/C) Minister of Housing and Water Irfaan Ali to appear before the Committees for alleged breaches of Parliamentary privileges.
Both matters were never resolved and the ninth Parliament has since been dissolved, in the process, debarring any further probing by the Parliamentary Committee.