By Kurt Campbell
[www.inewsguyana.com] – Opposition Leader, David Granger says he is yet to see the draft no – confidence motion which the Alliance of Change (AFC) has threatened to bring against the administration.
Updating the media on a meeting between his Parliamentary Coalition – A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) – and the AFC on Thursday, Granger said it was merely to get information on the proposal by the AFC.
“I have not yet seen a motion, I don’t know if there is a motion, I don’t know if it has even been drafted,” Granger told reporters at a news conference today, Friday, July 04.
He explained that the meeting was for APNU to be informed of the conditionality of the proposal to determine whether it is to be supported or not. When contacted, an executive member of the AFC confirmed with iNews that the motion has not been drafted.
According to the AFC Executive, the motion is still under consideration. “We are still meeting with stakeholders and having discussions but in terms of a final draft to be presented in the House, there is no such thing,” the AFC member said.
Meanwhile, Granger has pointed out that the APNU’s main concern is to prevent the Finance Minister Dr. Ashni Singh from spending monies unlawfully.
“We want to put measures in place to deal with this and we are working with AFC to ensure this immediate aim is achieved,” the Opposition Leader noted.
He added that it is not likely that there will not be a no – confidence vote until other avenues are explored and have failed.
To this end, the AFC spokesperson told iNews that the Party is also exploring other avenues, outside of the no – confidence vote, to prevent the Finance Minister from abusing the public purse.
In fact, the Minister was taken before the Committee several months ago for spending of a similar nature. However, the Committee is yet to convene a meeting to address the issue.
Dr. Singh told iNew last night that he will do it again because he did nothing wrong in the first place.
The Minister defended the current Statement of Excess which is to be debated at the next sitting of the House, maintaining it is lawful.
To support his claim, he cited Article 218:3 of the Constitution and also made reference to the ruling by the Chief Justice during the Budget Cut case.
“I don’t understand what all this hulaballoo is,” he said; recalling that the House had approved similar Statements of Excess, the present one being the fourth.