q
473
Leave of Absence Friday, 1st July, 1988 Oral Answers to Questions
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, 1st July, 1988
The House met at 1.32 p.m.
PRAYERS
[MR. SPEAKER in the Chair]
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, leave
of absence has been granted from
today's sitting to the hon. Member for
St. Joseph (Dr. Carson Charles) and the
hon. Member for Couva North (Mr.
Basdeo Panday).
FREE ZONES BILLS
Bill to proviue for the establishment of
free zones in Trinidad and Tobago and
for matters incidental thereto, brought
from the House of Representatives.
LThe Minister of Industry, Enterprise
and Tourism] read the first time.
SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS.-
Dr. Anseim St. George (San
Fernando West): Mr. Speaker, I beg to
present the following reports:
Kiwanis Club of Enterprise (Inc'n)
Bill
(1) Report of the select committee of
the House appointed to consider
and report on a bill for the
incorporation of the Kiwanis
Club of Enterprise, Trinidad and
for matters incidental thereto.
Mennonite Church .(Inc'n) Bill
(2) Report of the select committee of
the House appointed to consider
and report on a bill for the
incorporation of the Mennonite
Church of Trinidad and Tobago.
474
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
The following questions stood on the
Order Paper in the name of Mr. Patrick
Manning (San Fernando East):
Methanol Plant
(Point Fortin)
22. Would the Prime Minister tell this
House:
(i) The source from which the gas
to operate the proposed
methanol plant at Point Fortin
is to be derived?
(ii) The details of the gas pricing
formula for the methanol plant
and its relation to the gas
pricing formula in operation
for the Tringen 11 project?
(in) The effect this gas price will
have on the profitability of the
National Gas Company over
the next 16 years, i.e. up to the
year 2004?
Loans
(Construction Projects)
26. Would the Minister of Finance
and the Economy please state:
(i) How much of the $500 M. for
the funding of construction
projects in 1988 has been
raised by Government on the
local market to date?
(ii) How much of what has been
raised to date is allocated to be
spent in 1988:
(a) in Trinidad?
(b) in Tobago?
(iii) On what terms have these
loans been obtained and from
what source?
475
Oral Answers Friday, 1st July, 1988
Methanol Sales
30. Will the Minister of Industry,
Enterprise and Tourism inform this
House:
(a) The world market prices now
obtaining (May 1988) for
methanol sales from Trinidad
and Tobago?
(b) The world market price
obtained for methanol sales for
the comparable period in 1986
and 1987?
(c) The effect of these current
prices on the profitability or
loss eduction of the methanol
plant for 1988?
Mr. Speaker: Questions Nos. 22,
26 and 30 will be deferred to a
subsequent sitting.
Questions, by leave, deferred
Accounting Firm
(Contract)
29. Mr. Trevor Sudama
(Oropouche) asked the Minister of
Finance and the Economy:
Could the Minister state whether any
contract for consultancy or any other
service has been entered into by the
Government with the foreign
accounting firm of Peat, Marwick and
Mitchell with respect to the operation
and administration of the taxation
system in Trinidad and Tobago and, if
so, what is the contract sum?
The Minister in the Ministry of
Finance and the Economy (Hon.
Selby Wilson): Mr. Speaker, the
answer is as follows; yes, on 25th May,
1988 the Central Tenders Board
awarded Peat, Marwick, Mitchell and
476
to Questions
Company of Washington D.C, United
States of America the consultancy
contract to assist the Tax Performance
Committee to develop a tax reform
programme for the Ministry of Finance
and the Economy in accordance with
their proposal and fee structure:
Details of the programme are as
follows:
Phase I: Initial review of the entire
tax system with preliminary
recommendations for reform—US
$73,000.00
Phase II: Development of Computer-
based micro-simulation models of the
tax system to facilitate extensive
analysis of alternative tax measures—
US $361,000.00
Phase III: Detailed analysis and
development of specific tax reform
measures including a fully developed
implementation p 1 an - U S
$274,000.00.
On 30th June, 1987, twelve local and
foreign consulting firms were invited to
submit prequalification proposals to
assist Government in developing a tax
reform programme for Trinidad and
Tobago. Proposals were received from
five consulting firms. The other firms
indicated that they were not interested in
the exercise. The five firms were:
(i) Prognos A.G., Switzerland
(ii) Arthur D. Little Inc., USA
(iii) Peat Marwick, Mitchell and
Co.—Trinidad and Tobago
(iv) Coopers and Lybrand—
Trinidad and Tobago
(v) Price Waterhouse—USA
477
Oral Answers Friday, 1st July, 1988
The prequalification criteria
established by the Tax Performance
Committee were as follows:
(a) objectivity;
(b) work experience in the region;
(c) familiarity with the subject area;
(d) expertise in tax modelling; and
(e) the capability to complete the
exercise in nine months to
permit of its input into the 1989
budget.
Mr. Sudama: Mr. Speaker, could
the Minister state whether there was
adequate local capability for the carrying
Out of this consultancy service for the
Government?
Mr. Wilson: Mr. Speaker, may I
ask the hon. Member to repeat the
question, please?
Mr. Sudama: Could the Minister
state whether, from his investigations,
there was adequate local capability in
providing this consultancy service to the
Government?
Mr Wilson: Mr. Speaker, we invited
12 local and foreign consultant firms
and seven of those firms did not
respond. For example, in the 12 we
invited John Hunt and Company; Price
Waterhouse; Peat Marwick, Mitchell,
which is also a local firm; Cooper
Lybrand which is also in association
with a local firm, John Hunt and
Company. We were guided by the
recommendations of the Tax
Performance Committee on the final
selection. I am not in a position to
express an opinion because I did not
proceed along those lines.
478
to Questions
Mr. Sudama: Is the hon. Minister
aware that certain members of the Tax
Performance Committee tendered their
resignations as a consequence of the
award of this consultancy contract?
Mr. Wilson: Yes, I am aware.
1.40 p.m.
CODE OF ETHICS
The Prime Minister and
Minister of Finance and the
Economy (Hon. A. N. R.
Robinson): Mr. Speaker, I have the
honour to move the following motion:
Be it resolved,
That this House adopt the Code of
Ethics to be observed by
Parliamentarians and the Code of
Ethics for Ministers and
Parliamentary Secretaries which
were laid in the House of
Representatives on 20th May, 1988.
These codes have their parent code in
a code which was laid on the Table in
this House on 13th March, 1987 and
that document was laid in pursuance of
the undertaking given in our elections
manifesto of 1986. In that manifesto we
undertook to implement a programme of
measures designed to facilitate the
improvement of standards in public life.
One of these measures was an
amendment to the Prevention of
Corruption Act; another was legislation
to provide for the establishment of the
Integrity Commission, which was
provided for in the Republican
Constitution of 1976. And these codes
of ethics form part of this programme of
measures which, as I have indicated,
were designed to facilitate high
479 480
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988 Ethics
[HON. A.N.R. ROBINSON]
standards of conduct by Members of The codes provide for safeguards or
Parliament. efforts to assist Members of Parliament
to avoid situations where their private
The codes relate to Members of both interest may conflict with their public
Houses of Parliament and it is expected duty. And may I emphasize, Mr.
that at a later date codes will be adopted Speaker, that these are essentially
by bodies such as the local government guidelines; they are not provisions of
authorities as well as the Tobago House law with sanctions to be imposed in
of Assembly. cases of breach. They are provisions of
an ethical nature and the sanctions to be
Whereas previously the code which applied would be the opinions of other
was laid on the 13th March, 1987 parliamentarians and of the public at
embodied the provisions in one large. At a later stage it may be
document, the documents before the necessary to implement or embody some
House relate to parliamentarians on the of these provisions in the form of
one hand and Ministers and legislation, but the Government's view
Parliamentary Secretaries on the other, at this stage is that firstly, the principles
the reason being that it was felt, after the which it is expected that Members would
receipt of public comment, that the observe would set out clearly, that they
applicable provisions were separate in would be understood and that there
some instances and consequently should would be a greater probability of their
be provided in separate documents. being observed after a period of time
Although Ministers and Parliamentary when Members are fully acquainted with
Secretaries, for example, are ultimately these provisions.
responsible to Parliament in the course May I say, Mr. Speaker, that
of their day-to-day dealings and in the provisions of this nature are to be found
running of their departments, they are in codes of ethics of one kind or another
immediately responsible to Cabinet and in many democratic countries and
to the Prime Minister. It is the Prime certainly in countries such as the United
Minister who appoints them and can Kingdom, the United States and
relieve them of their responsibilities, so Canada, and other Commonwealth
that while Parliament can set guidelines countries besides the United Kingdom
for the proper behavior of its Members and Canada. There are provisions
in their capacity as parliamentarians, it is regarding the treatment of gifts, for
the Prime Minister and the Cabinet that example/ there are provisions about
must supervise the behaviour of engaging 'in business or in professions,
Ministers in their capacity as Ministers. as the case may be, and there are
It was therefore proposed that there be provisions relating to the principles
one code of ethics for parliamentarians which should guide a Member who
and a separate code of ethics for finds that he or she is in a position
Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries. where the interest of that Member is
The code of ethics for parliamentarians likely to conflict with the duties as
would obviously also apply to Ministers parliamentarian. May I just briefly go
and to Parliamentary Secretaries. through some of these provisions.

/
481
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
Before I deal specifically with the
provisions of the codes, may I say that
the code which was laid on the table on
the 13th March, 1987, was pilished
for public comment and the Government
has been in receipt of comments from
the Law Association of Trinidad and
Tobago and from the parliamentary arm
of the National Alliance for
Reconstruction. I wish to express on
behalf of the Government my deepest
appreciation for these comments which
have been received from the Law
Association and the parliamentary arm of
the National Alliance for Reconstruction.
The other comment received was from
an individual, who was not at the time a
judge, but is at the present time a High
Court judge. I should like also to
express my deep appreciation to Mr.
Anthony Lucky, who is now Judge
Lucky, for the time and trouble that he
took to submit a redraft of the code,
which was very helpful in the
formulation of the final code which has
been presented to this House.
1.50 p.m.
The introduction to the code makes the
comment, Mr. Speaker, that our multi-
religious society is a politically
sophisticated and economically complex
one, our economic interests and
employment diverse and transverse.
Social relationships in our plural
society, especially in family matters vary
and within recent years have changed
significantly. The personal legal and
social independence of spouses is
recognized as equal. It is in this scenario
that politicians can encounter difficulty
in agreeing upon the public's view of
the boundaries between public and
private interests.
482
Ethics
The politician is faced with the
challenge of a course of conduct which
must be consistent with public opinion
which in this country seems to change
as conditions improve or degenerate. In
order to accept the challenge to improve
one has to face reality and state it. Public
confidence and trust in the impartiality
of government in general terms have
been severely eroded in the past, and
suspicion of persons in public life is rife
among our people. Bribery and
corruption had been the order of the
day, and although it appears to have
become dormant, it can erupt at any
time. This is from the comment which
was made in March, 1987
"We are in a dilemma. It is therefore
necessary to take steps to provide
some sign posts to help guide our
parliamentarians and the public whom
they serve so that they earn and
maintain the trust and the confidence
of the public."
Now may I refer to some of the
specific provisions of the code relating
to parliamentarians which are set out in
the guidelines and may I refer
specifically to Guideline 4 which states
as follows:
"In any debate or proceedings of a
House or its committees, or in any
transactions, or communications
which a parliamentarian may have
with other parliamentarians or with
Ministers or persons in public office
he/she shall disclose any relevant
pecuniary interest or benefit of
whatever nature, whether direct or
indirect, that he/she may have had,
may have or may be expecting to
have."
483
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[HON. A.N.R. ROBINSON]
Guideline 5 states:
"A declaration of interest shall be
made by a parliamentarian at the
earliest opportunity when speaking in
debate or taking part in committee
proceedings. Such declaration should
be automatically recorded as part of
the official record and indexed in
Hansard for convenience of reference.
A parliamentarian shall perform the
duties of his office..
According to the Interpretation Act this
also means "her office"-
"... impartially, uninfluenced by fear
or favour"
A parliamentarian shall be open and
honest in official dealings with
colleagues.
"A parliamentarian shall avoid
situations in which his private interests
whether pecuniary or otherwise
conflict or might reasonably be
thought to conflict with public duty"
Paragraph 9 of the codes provides that:
"When a parliamentarian possesses,
directly or indirectly, an interest which
conflicts or which might reasonably be
thought to conflict with his public
duty, or improperly to influence his
conduct in the discharge of his
responsibilities in respect of some
matter with which he is concerned, he
shall disclose that interest publicly in
accordance with the form prescribed in
the Article 4 above. Should
circumstances change after an initial
disclosure was made, so that new or
additional facts become material, the
parliamentarian shall disclose the
further information."
484
Ethics
So that if a parliamentarian makes an
initial disclosure of conflict of interest,
and identifies that interest which may
conflict with his public duty and the
circumstances thereafter change, and the
interest undergoes a change, then it is
incumbent on the parliamentarian to
disclose that change in the
circumstances.
The provision also relates to the
immediate members of his family. So
that:
"When the interests of the members
of his immediate family are involved,
the parliamentarian shall disclose those
interests, to the extent that they are
known to him/her. Members of the
immediate family will ordinarily
comprise only the parliamentarian's
spouse and dependent children, but
may include other members of his
household or family when their
interests are closely connected."
There is provision about the use of
information obtained in the course of
public duty and there is a prohibition
against the use of that information in a
manner which may directly or indirectly
bring some kind of pecuniary advantage
for the parliamentarian or any other
person. And the provision goes on to
stipulate that:
"In particular a parliamentarian shall
scrupulously avoid investments or
other transactions about which he has
or might reasonably be thought to
have, early or confidential information
which might confer on him an unfair
or improper advantage over other
persons."
So that if information is obtained in the
course of one's duty as a
485
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
parliamentarian we must not use that
information in order to obtain any kind
of pecuniary advantage, and in fact must
not even appear to be in a position
where that use of information can result
in that kind of advantage.
Article 12 provides that:
"A parliamentarian shall not:
(1) solicit or accept from any
person any remuneration or
benefit for the discharge of
the duties of his office over
and above the official
remuneration."
So that if anybody offers a
parliamentarian any reward for taking up
a particular matter related to the duties of
the parliamentarian that reward must be
refused, it must not be accepted.
The article continues:
"(2) must not solicit or accept any
benefit, advantage or even
promise of future advantage
whether for self, immediate
family or any business
concern or trust with which
he is associated from persons
who are in, or seek to be in,
any contractual or special
relationship with the
government."
So that in the course of one dealings
with a person who has a contractual
relationship or who is in position or
who seeks to be in a position to have a
contractual or special relationship with
the government that parliamentarian
must not in the tourse of such dealings
solicit or accept any benefit, advantage
or promise of future advantage whether
for self or family as the case may be.
486
Ethics
And as an extension of that provision:
"(3) except as may be permitted
under the rules applicable to
his office, a parliamentarian
may not accept any gift,
hospitality or concessional
travel offered in connection
with the discharge of he
duties of office.
A parliamentarian shall be
scrupulous in his use of
public property and services
and shall not permit their
misuse by other persons."
And article 14 provides that:
"A parliamentarian shall not allow
the pursuit of his private interests to
interfere with the proper discharge of
public duties."
These may appear to be rigorous
provisions, Mr. Speaker, but I feel sure
that there are provisions which can be
observed as indeed they are expected to
be observed in democratic institutions of.
this nature. And it is absolutely essential
that parliamentarians be seen to be
observing these rules, these principles
and these guidelines of behaviour in
order to promote public confidence and
public trust in the office of the
parliamentarian. The articles to which I
have referred are not exhaustive—there
are others—but these are the most
important.
2.00 p.m.
I have previously stated, Mr. Speaker,
that there are provisions which obtain in
other Parliaments as well. I believe that
these guidelines have been observed in
the past by most, if not all of the
parliamentarians and they certainly can
487
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[HON. A.N.R. ROBINSON]
be observed in the future by all of us
who are members of this Parliament. I
cannot overemphasize the importance,
especially in times when public
institutions are under stress of all kindsh
that all of us who are engaged in the
course of public duties should
endeavour to maintain standards which
can promote confidence in the offices
which we have the honour to hold.
As I mentioned, this is part of the
whole programme4ncluding legislative
measures and will not be the end of the
measures introduced. Mr. Speaker, I
want to emphasize at this stage, I am not
suggesting for one moment that
legislative measures can produce
morality or ethical standards of the
highest nature, ethical standards are by
their very nature standards which must
be voluntarily attained and voluntarily
kept. Legislative measures can provide
for the floor below which individuals in
public office are not expected to fall. But
beyond the floor that is provided by the
legislative measures there are standards
which they are expected to attain and
maintain as persons occupying high
public office.
While the code of ethics of Ministers
and parliamentary secretaries is strictly
not a matter for Parliament, and as I
have previously mentioned would better
be effected by communication between
members of the Cabinet, the Prime
Minister and parliamentary secretaries, I
think it would be useful for the public to
be aware of the standards which have
been set out in this code for observance
by Ministers and parliamentary
secretaries, and here I refer to the codes.
At meetings of the Cabinet and its
committees, a Minister shall disclose to
488
Ethics
his colleagues when he has an interest
which does, or might reasonably be
thought likely to conflict with his public
duty as a Minister. So the obligation
again is on disclosure. If a Minister has
any interest that conflicts or is likely to
conflict with his duties as a Minister that
Minister's duty is to disclose that
interest to his ministerial colleagues.
This code provides that that declaration
shall be noted in the Cabinet records. So
not only is it declared orally, but it is
written into the Cabinet records. The
Minister shall then indicate that he will
not take part in the discussion in
question or else secure the explicit
authorization of his colleagues for taking
part.
Article two provides that when
directing or dealing with the business of
the department which he administers a
Minister shall inform the Prime Minister
of any real or apparent conflict of
interest that arises. The Prime Minister,
unless he asks the Minister to divest
himself of the interest, shall either
arrange for another Minister to deal with
the matter or else give explicit
authorization to the original Minister to
proceed with it/'rhat is to say when the
Minister discloses the interest, the Prime
Minister can request him to either get rid
of it or divest of it or arrange for another
Minister to handle the matter which
would appear to be in conflict to the
private interest of the Minister, and in
any event the matter shall be recorded.
The code provides that where a
Minister is required to divest his
interests, it would be unacceptable for
him to transfer those interests to certain
persons, for example, to his spouse, to
another member of the family, to a
489
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
nominee company or trust as the case
may be. The returns of Ministers'
disclosure of interests shall be made to
the Prime Minister and shall be kept in a
Register of Interests, on a confidential
basis by the Secretary to Cabinet.
These are the kinds of interests which
the Minister is required to disclose. A
beneficial interest under any trust or
company with a statement of the nature
of operations of the trust or company.
Any trust of which the Minister is a
trustee, with a statement of the
beneficiaries and the nature of the
operations of the trust, partnership and
joint venture interests with a statement
of the nature of their operations, the
Minister's liabilities, shareholdings,
land and property owned by the
Minister. In the case of directorships,
the Minister shall resign directorship in
all companies. Ministers shall cease to
engage in professional practice and shall
cease to be involved in the daily routine
of any business. Those are very clear
prohibitions.
There are also provisions relating to
gifts. A Minister is required to report in
writing the receipt by him in the course
of his official duties of any gift from any
foreign government, any corporate or
unincorporated body engaged in
business or individual. The gifts above
the value of $500.00 shall be deemed
the property of the State. There are some
of us who have been recording all gifts
that we have received since we came
into office. I myself have a register of
gifts in the Prime Minister's Office, the
number of which now exceeds one
hundred.and those gifts are all described
and identified so that anyone at anytime
now or hereafter can see the gifts which
490
Ethics
were received by the Prime Minister
while he was in office. I know other
Ministers have been doing the same
irrespective of the value of the gift
whether exceedings $500.00 or not
exceeding $500.000.
Article 8 of that code provides that a
Minister shall not accept or receive either
directly or indirectly any fee,
compensation, gift or reward for or in
respect of or in connection with the
promotion of or opposition to any matter
or thing submitted or intended to be
submitted for the consideration of
Cabinet or any of its committees. So that
when a matter comes before the Cabinet,
a Minister in respect of that matter
whether promoting it or opposing it
shall not accept any reward or fee as the
case may be. The basic principle
involved here is that a person must not
use his public office for private gain.
As an extension of that principle and
in respect of the need to promote
confidence, he must not even appear to
be using his public office for private
gain whether it be in the course of
business or in the exercise of his
professional or in respect of the receipt
of gifts or rewards as the case may be.
All of that is out. There are exceptions in
the case of minor courtesies, for
example, gifts here not exceeding
$500.00 in value which are received as
courtesies. A Minister may visit a village
council 'for exampl.or a village and /
receive'a gift from the goodwill of the
villagers an( /the value does not exceed
$500.00; he will be permitted to keep
that gift. As I have said all.such gifts in
the case of the Prime Minister are in any
event in a register and I will advocate the
same in respect of certain Ministers of
the current Cabinet.
491
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[HON. A.N.R. ROBINSON]
2.10 p.m.
It is extremely important. This is not a
matter to be taken lightly. Every step of
this nature that we take, whether in
respect of the amendment to the
Prevention of Corruption Act or the
Integrity in Public Life Act, and the
introduction of the Integrity
Commission which is now being
constituted, which has an office and
which will soon be functioning under
the Integrity Act as it is intended to
perform, whether in respect of any of
these matters, it is a matter of the utmost
seriousness and requires that kind of
approach from parliamentarians.
There has been a great deal o f
cynicism in this country regarding the
conduct of parliamentarians in public
life, to the extent that it is almost felt that
to be a parliamentarian is to be subject to
the presumption of being corrupt. It is a
very unfortunate state of affairs in
Trinidad and Tobago and I think we all
should do everything in our power to
remove that stigma which has come to
be attached to public office in this
country.
It is not the only country where
politicians are very often labelled with
that kind of stigma, but action is taken
and action is seen to be taken in many
countries where persons in public life
fall below the required standard and
infringe, at least, principles of law and
in many instances, ethical principles.
There is no reason why we cannot do
the same in Trinidad and Tobago. We all
aspire to the higher standards in public
life. We can attain to the higher
standards in public life. It should be our
determination to do so regardless of the
492
Ethics
cost. And I am confident that this
Parliament will make every effort in
order to set the standards which have
been enunciated in this document in
these codes of ethics, both the
Parliament and the Cabinet, and that
there would be some kind of example
set from this level and from the Cabinet
level for others who hold public office
in this country.
The kinds of revelations which have
been taking place and which continue to
take place are no cause for pride for any
of us as citizens of this country, and it is
our very solemn duty, an extremely
solemn duty, on all of us to assist in
every possible way to clean up the
public life of Trinidad and Tobago. And
in the little way that we can do in the
presentation of this code of ethics along
with the rest of the elements of the
programme to promote integrity in
public life, we are happy to do so and
we invite Members on the other side to
join with us in a demonstration of
complete unanimity concerning the
standards that we should observe and
the need to observe those standards and
set an example to the rest of the country.
I thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Question proposed.
Mr. Morris Marshall (Port-of-
Spain East): Mr. Speaker, possibly it is
coincidence that today we have in the
galleryat least)students from two
educational institutions while we discuss
a matter of this kind.
Firstly, let me make the point that the
PNM today will support any measure/
that will assist in bringing about
improvement in the standards in public
life. That has always been the position
/
/
493
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
of the People's National Movement in
the past and it is still so today.
Notwithstanding what people may
say, that is in fact, the position of the
People's National Movement. So we on
this side, will continue to support any
measure, or measures, that would assist
in this direction.
What really is the objective of this
motion before the House today? You
see, while the Government continues to
talk about ethical standards, about high
moral standards, about parliamentarians
behaving in a certain way, and so on,
notwithstanding what they may say/and
they seem to be the only people ho
think otherwise, it is clear to the entire
country that every single day, they
themselves are breaking some of the
basic and important principles that
govern high moral standards in public
life.
There has been one deviation today
coming from the Government and that
has been the announcement that the
Parliamentary Secretary in the Ministry
of Food Production was dismissed
yesterday. I want to congratulate the
Prime Minister on that stand. I hope that
he will not stop there but will continue. I
hope that he will look very soon at the
Member for Ortoire/Mayaro, who, while
he makes all sorts of utterances about
integrity and principles and so on,
continues to embarrass not only the
Government but the country as a whole.
Let us look at some specific areas.
Here we are today talking about the need
for a certain type of behaviour by
Members of Parliament. You have the
same Government who appoints as
Minister without Portfolio, the General
//
494
Ethics
Secretary of the party that runs the
affairs of the country, paying with
public funds to see about the affairs of
their party while they talk about the
question of a lack of funds and so on.
And they are so brazen with it.
Secretary of the NAR, is a Minister of
Government being paid by public
funds? We are not following any
bandwagon. The PNM was the first to
raise this issue. It is unethical.
Mr. Robinson: Mr. Speaker, may I
ask the Member, how does that violate
this code of ethics? What provision does
it violate?
Mr. Marshall: Mr. Speaker, I do
not even think I need to respond to that.
That is the dishonesty of what is
emanating from the corridors of power.
Mr. Speaker: I am following your
arguments very, very closely, but a
word like, dishonesty, at this stage, I
think it is inappropriate. I do not want to
detract from what you are saying.
Continue. But I wanted to put that on
the records and make it very clear.
Mr. Marshall: I wish to withdraw
that particular statement. But it is very
unfair. If today we are talking about
ethical ,standards, that, to me, is quite
clearly/totally and completely unethical
and it is clear for any thinking person to
see then you come and ,yoi ask
a ques'ckm at this time. So they need to
deal with that type of situation, Mr.
Speaker and give the country the
impressiOn by their deeds that they are
serious about developing and inculcating
in the Members of Parliament high
moral standards.
495 496
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988 Ethics
[MR. MARSHALL]
2.20 p.m.,1 . Member for Port-of-Spain East, in
Let us say, forjargument. sake, that examining what is before the House,
the entire PNM thbinet was corrupt, that wishes to make any comparison or he
they stole everything? How can he wants to make any reference to any
justify that in 1987 and in 1988 when item, I would advise the hon. member to
the same Government who campaigned ensure that there is some kind of
on that particular matter, this whole connection between what he is saying
question of corruption, is today by their and with what is before the House. That
own behaviour—and they are so brazen is for his guidance.
that the/come here today with this Mr. Marshall: Mr. Speaker, clearly
particul'ar motion. Mr. Speaker, we go there is a connection because we are
further. We are talking about high moral talking about high moral standardqand I ,.
and ethical standards. am saying there is contradiction in what
Let us look, for example, at the they are putting before the House today
Government's behaviour with respect to by their very behaviour over the last 16
the question of drugs. You have that to 17 months that they have been the
infamous Drug Report. Based on that Government and that is my point. More
over 50 police officers were suspended than that, the hon. Member for Tobago
and five magistrates, I think, were also East the hon. Prime Minister, talks
suspended. The report never made any about my behaviour in more recent
statement about any particular previous times. I am not the previous PNM
Cabinet Minister. regime. Let it be clearly understood that
I am going to fight to the death anybody
Mr. Robinson: Mr. Speaker, on a who attempts to discredit Morris
point of order, the hon. Member is Marshall, so he had better have
irrelevant. We are discussing a code of information to back up the statement he
ethics, the provisions of which are is making.
clearly stated. If he is going to open up I am not going to tolerate that. If they
the debate in that fashion, it is going to wished to tolerate that in the past, that is
lead to a whole examination of the a matter for them. Any time they wish to
record of his previous Government and make accusations about the Member for
his own record within recent times. Is Port-of-Spain East, I am going to
that the kind of debate that should ensue demand that they bring facts to support
on a matter of this kind? the allegations that they are making
Mr. Speaker: The subject that is against the Member for Port-of-Spain
under discussion—[Interruption] May I East. So I am not accepting that at all. I
have some order please? The subject have no desire, no urgency to be in this
under discussion is a code of ethics to House among Members like you all,
be observed by parliamentarians and a absolutely no urgency or interest—
code of ethics for Ministers and [Interruption]
Parliamentary Secretaries. It has to do I have made the point about my
with the behaviour and the conduct of resignation and that is clear. I can
Members of Parliament and if the hon. resign in the morning. All of you put
 497
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
together, through you, Mr. Speaker,
cannot beat Morris Marshall in East
Port-of-Spain at this particular point in
time. So that is not an issue.
I am saying, Mr. Speaker, through
you, that there is need for a certain kind
of behaviour. One of the most critical
issues facing this country today is the
question of drugs and on the basis of the
report that I spoke about, I said before
that there are certain persons who were
suspended. There has been talk about
previous Cabinet Ministers. People go
as far as Washington and make all sorts
of statements without bringing the
evidence, discrediting not the PNM,
understand that, they are discrediting
Trinidad and Tobago. That is what they
are doing. And while they make those
statements, one of their own party
colleagues whose name was mentioned
in the Report, you send that person as
an Ambassador to Brazil. So what are
we talking about today? It is nothing
more than another sham, another con
game on the people of Trinidad and
Tobago that we will not support.
Let us look on page 2 at the question
of the guidelines for Parliament. I am
dealing specifically now with the motion
that is before us and the information
here on page 2, item 7 says:
"A Parliamentarian shall be open and
honest in official dealings with
colleagues."
Can we say that about the treatment of
even their very own Members, Mr.
Speaker? Can we say that about the
treatment of the hon. Member for St.
Joseph, I think it is, and the Minister of
Works ir the hon. Member for
/ Tabaquite in dealing with the question of
498
Ethics
the DEWD programme in 1987? Can we
say that with respect, Mr. Speaker—
Mr. Robinson: Mr. Speaker, again
I rise on a point of order. I am
mentioning this and it is the third time I
am rising because I should like to see
standards maintained in this Parliament
and if the Member is going to use this
occasion where we are not discussing
individuals at all—individuals are not
being discussed. I deliberately kept
away from reference to any group or
individual, but if the Member begins like
this, there is going to be no end to that
kind of behaviour. I submit, Mr.
Speaker, that it is irrelevant and it is
unworthy of this Parliament.
Mr. Speaker: Again from the
documents that are before the House,
one has stated objects and the first that I
see before me is that:
"The objects of the code are to
enhance public confidence in the
integrity of Parliamentarians by:
establishing clear rules of conduct
reflecting conflict of interest for
Parliamentarians;
by minimizing the possibility of
conflicts arising between the private
interests and public duties o f
Parliamentarians
By making reference to someone who
has been appointed as an ambassador,
etcetera, has nothing to do with
parliamentarians and a code of ethics.
What we have to do is to discuss this
document as it affects parliamentarians
so that I should like the hon. Member
for Port-of-Spain East as I say, to link
up whatever he says to the documents
that are before the House.
 499
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[MR. SPEAKER]
The hon. Prime Minister has indicated
that Members should not deal with
individuals. It is the ruling of the Chair
that if, in the name of freedom of speech
as a basic privilege in this House, the
Member feels it is necessary for him to
call names in order to further discussion
on these two documents, I emphasize,
further discussion on these two
documents, and calling of such names is
relevant to the discussion of these two
documents, you may proceed. But so
long as he does that outside of these two
documents, I will rule him out of order.
Mr. Marshall: Mr. Speaker, I am
trying to show a question of attitudes, a
question of behaviour. It is not my
concern about the personalities who may
be involved, but I am talking about a
certain type of behaviour which
contradicts what is before us here. That
is my point. It contradicts this document
before us and I am saying that we can
come here every single Friday and bring
a new code of ethics to be observed by
parliamentarians, unless we are sincere
in what we are about, unless by our
very attitudes, by our very behaviour
and our very standards that we set for
ourselves, we can show we are serious
about what we are trying to get across, it
will make absolutely no sense.
2.30 p.m.
It is extremely difficult for those of us
on this side to accept that the
Government is serious about what they
presented here today. I repeat 1 -we in
the People's National Movement,
because of the crisis situation that this
country is today facing— require that we
.1
have people at the helm who can provide
a certain kind of standard and guidelines
for our people, especially our youths.
/
500
Ethics
We will support any measure that will
effect and facilitate those standards, but
I have great difficulty in really accepting
that the Government is sincere about
what it says here,whenA put that against
what I have Zn sethng over the last
year and a hand I think that before
they come to this Parliament with yet
another sham on the people of Trinidad
and Tobago, they need to put their act
together, they need to really look
inwardly at themselves because the
country is watching and the country is,
in my view, absolutely fed up with the
con game and the fraud that they have
perpetrated on the people of Trinidad
and Tobago. Unless they can establish
that they are serious we on this side will
not support any of these measures
which we know is yet another
opportunity on their part to pull the wool
over the people's eyes.
Mr. Speaker, I say again that we
cannot support a measure of this kind
because we do not think the
Government is serious; and that we
want them to establish by their
behaviour, by their attitudes over the
next few years, that they are serious,
then they can return to the Parliament
with a code of ethics that they wish
parliamentarians to observe. Thank you.
Mr. Anthony Smart (Diego Martin
East): Mr. Speaker, before I get into the
meat of my presentation I should like to
say "let him that is without sin cast the
first stone." I direct those remarks to the
hon. Member for Port-of-Spain East,
who, during the course of the Local
Government Elections Campaign said to
all the world that he would resign if the
PNM lost the local government election.
It was clear, it was unequivocal and
unambiguous.
501
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
Mrs. Donawa-McDavidson: Mr.
Speaker on a point of information. May
I be advised if the introduction to the
debate by the hon. Member for Diego
Martin East is relevant to the code of
ethics, based on the objections made by
the hon. Member for Tobago East?
Mr. Speaker: He was just warming
up, I think he is finished now.
Mr. Smart: Mr. Speaker, the hon.
Member for Port of Spain East is still
with us today in spite of the results. We
are happy to have him here because by
the contributions he has been making he
makes our job easier and we can address
our minds to much more difficult
matters facing this nation.
The Member also said that his Party
has supported and will support any
measures which promote integrity in
public life/but it is difficult to understand
how he (An say that when the measure
promoting integrity in public life,
contained in the 1976 Constitution—a
requirement of the Constitution, I
believe it is Chapter 10, a whole Chapter
of the Constitution devoted to the
Integrity Commission! For 10 whole
years that provision ofthe basic law of
the land was neglected and actively so
by the former administration, run by the
PNM party. So I am really surprised that
the Member for Port of Spain East can
stand up and make the sort of statements
that he has made.
He has made reference also to the fact
that the Member for Caroni East is now
a Member of this illustrious Cabinet of
Trinidad and Tobago. I studied politics
formally during my years at university
and I studied politics to some extent
from those years until 1979, when I
502
Ethics
became actively involved in polit d
from all I have learnt—I may be ~tnmgi,
,
I am sure I am not—there is absolutely
nothing wrong or questionable about the
Member for Caroni East, the General
Secretary of the NAR, being a Minister
of Government, a Minister without
portfolio. It happens in all jurisdictions.
As a matter of fact I seem to recall that in
the administration of the PNM there was
a certain Minister, I think his name was
W. J. Alexander, who was a Minister
without portfolio. So that it is mere
obfuscation on the part of the Member
for Port of Spain East to stand up here
and to suggest—
Mr. Sudama: Would the Member
give way to a question? Is the Member
implying that a NAR Government is now
following procedures laid down by the
PNM?
Mr. Smart: Apparently the Member
for Oropouche did not hear when I saidh .
that in jurisdictions all over the world
which follow the parliamentary
traditions that we follow, there are
Ministers without portfolio in the
Cabinets. In Jamaica there was a Mr.
Hector Winter who at one time was a
Minister without portfolio, so that it is a
noifloint on the part of the Member for
Por'of Spain East.
Mr. Speaker, I support this motion
wholeheartedly I see it as yet another
step taken by the Government of
Trinidad and Tobago to develop a
culture of accountability and openness—
I think the Russians call it "glassnost"-
the Member for Couva South might be
able to help me.
503
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[HON. A. SMART]
2.40 p.m.
As the hon. Prime Minister has said,
this Government has already brought
into being the Prevention of Corruption
Act which makes specific reference to
Members of the House of
Representatives and Members of the
Senate and proscribes certain kinds of
behaviour and indeed imposes prison
terms and very onerous fines for the
kinds of behaviour proscribed. And the
Integrity in Public Life Act provides for
Members of this House along with
Permanent Secretaries, Chief Technical
Officers and Ministers to make
declarations to the Integrity Commission
of their assets and liabilities. Those
declarations will be confidential and not
open to the public. Only the
Commissioners will have access to
those declarations. As the Prime
Minister has said, that Act was
proclaimed yesterday. So that within the
next three months we, the Members of
this House, will be required by law to
make our declarations to the Integrity
Commission.
Mr. Speaker, while we are on that
point, there has been some debate as to
whether the commissioners were
properly appointed under the Integrity in
Public Life Act. There is absolutely no
question about the propriety of those
appointments if one looks at section 43
of the Interpretation Act. I shall read the
part that is relevant in this case. Section
43 says:
"Where a written law that is not to
come into force immediately on the
passing or making thereof confers
power—
(a) to make appointments;
504
Ethics
that power may, for the purpose of
making the written law effective upon
its commencement, be exercised at any
time after the passing or making
thereof;"
So that that provision of the
Interpretation Act clearly allows for the
appointment of commissioners under the
Integrity in Public Life Act before the
proclamation which took place
yesterday.
Mr. Speaker, it is my personal view
that the most important and most
difficult task facing this Government is
not to turn around the economy,
although I think that is probably the
second most important task of this
Government, but I think the most
important task is to get the nation to
focus once more on the noble qualities
and noble virtues of mankind. The task
also is to convince the nation that it is
worthwhile and that there is reward in
pursuing all that is noble in the nature of
man. I refer to virtues such as honesty,
respect for one's fellow man, dedicated
service and application in whatever field
of endeavour one finh oneself and of
course, integrity, and so on. It must no
longer be the case where the slick and
the 'smartman' succeed.
Mr. Sudama: You are not referring
to yourself?
Mr. Smart: Not myself, no. And
where the lazy and those who have
connections in high places are rewarded.
It is going to be an extremely difficult
task but for me it is the most important
task of this Government here today.
The baser qualities of man appear to
have dominated the nobler ones on a
national and governmental scale over the
505 506
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988 Ethics

decade or so that ended in the year 1986 decisions both in Government and
because of what I consider a elsewhere for the eventual good of this
combination of two factors; the easy nation.
availability of money and material things The leadership of the country must
and a government that eschewed demonstrate
morality in public affairs. Do not read can filter downthese to
virtues so that they
the rest of the society.
me wrongly, Mr. Speaker. I am not The leadership must set the example, it
saying that money is not important and
material things are not desirable. I think it must be a challenge to"do
must not be a question of as I say",
they are very desirable and good to Members of this Parliament, toleaders, the
"do as I
have. But what I am saying is that they do".
must be used and enjoyed in an
environment and on principles that We have before us two documents
promote and are consistent with the which have been exhaustively dealt with
noble virtues of man to which I have by the mover of the motion so that there
already adverted; honesty, integrity, is no need for me to go into any other
hard work and respect. aspects of the two codes. Depending on
one's
This task of restoring these virtues to not have view of politics one may or may
the noble and high vaulted place that subscribing difficulty or facility with
they must be at must begin with the Speaker, permit to the code of ethics. Mr.
leaders of the nation. Indeed it has quotations by certain me to refer to some
already begun with the leaders of the they consider their viewpeople of
on what
politics.
nation. Witness for instance, as I said
before, the passage of the Integrity in "A politician is one who would
Public Life Act. Witness most recently circumvent God."
the behaviour of the Member for St. That comes from Shakespeare's Hamlet.
Ann's West. I wish to congratulate him
for what he demonstrated to me as the Another quotation:
highest traditions of parliamentary "A politician—in friendship false,
democracy and I sincerely wish to implacable in hate, resolved to ruin or
congratulate him on his behaviour which
we all should pH emulate. to rule the State."
Mr. Sudama: He should have That is from Dryden.
resigned. Why did he not resign? Mr. Sudama: To whom are you
Mr. Smart: Mr. Speaker, I also referring?
wish to refer to the tolerance displayed Mr. Smart: I continue.
by the hon. Prime Minister which some "An honest politician is one who
people, to their detriment, have mistaken when he is bought will stay bought."
for weakness. I also want to refer to the
willingness on the other hand of the That comes from a man called Simon
hon. Prime Minister to take hard, Cameron, the Republican boss of
unpopular, but in my respectful view, Pennsylvania in the United States in
absolutely essential and necessary 1980.
507
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[HON. A. SMART]
"Idealism is the noble toga that
political gentlemen drape over their
will to power"
That is from Aldous Huxley, The New
York Herald, 24th November, 1963.
I will give you some quotations, Mr.
Speaker, on politics—we are talking
about the politician and politics:
"You cannot adopt politics as a
profession and remain honest."
This was said by a gentleman by the
name of Louis Mc Henry Howe,
Secretary to Franklin T. Roosevelt.
2.50 p.m.
Another quotation on what politics is:
"The conduct of public affairs for
private advantage."
One final quotation:
"In politics there is no honour."
Mr. Speaker, I gave those quotations
purely to emphasize what the hon.
Prime Minister has said in his remarks
about the view that is popular among a
large number of people as to what
politics and the politician are about.
I happen to hold the view, and the
members of this Government happen to
hold the view of the famous well-know;
philosopher by the name of Aristotle as
to what politics is. He said:
"...the good of man must be the end
of the science of politics..
And we in this Government believe that
politics must serve the people, must
serve the good of man; that is what
politics is about. You are there to serve,
you are there at the highest level in the
society in order to serve mankind and to
508
Ethics
serve the people of Trinidad and
Tobago. And that is the reason why this
Government has been able to introduce
in this Parliament, in such a short space,
so many measures to ensure that the
integrity of the politician)The integrity
of the Government is presered.
I happen to hold the view also that at
some later stage this Parliament, this
House1 should consider possibly—and
this is a matter that we can discuss as
Members of the House at a later stage—
quite apart from the requirements under
the Integrity in Public Life Act, to make
declarations—and of course, as I said
those declarations would be
confidential, private and would not be
available to the public—as is done in
England, setting up a Register of
Members' Interests. The code requires
that Members make a declaration of their
pecuniary interests in the course of a
debate in the House or at committee
stage. I am suggesting, Mr. Speaker,
that one could look seriously at
introducing such a Register of
Members' Interests.
I wish to quote from a document
called Register of Members Interests,
dated 12th January, 1987 which was
ordered to be printed.by the House of
Commons in England. It says:
"The House resolved in May, 1974
to establish a Register of Members'
Interests and in June, 1975,
substantially agreed to a report from
the Select Committee on Members'
Interests which set out the purpose
and scope of the register and
arrangements connected with the
registration of interests.
The purpose of the register is to
provide information of any pecuniary
509
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
interest or other material benefit which
a Member might receive which might
be thought to affect his conduct as a
Member or influence his actions,
speeches or vote in Parliament and
Members are required to have this
general purpose in mind when
determining what interests should be
properly declared. They may, if they
think it right and relevant, disclose
interests beyond those set out below.
The scope of the register, devised by
the select committee and adopted by
the House, seeks to balance, on the
one hand, what should be publicly
known about Members of Parliament
with, on the other hand, the proper
degree of privacy to which they and
their families are entitled. They are not
required to disclose the amount of any
remuneration or the benefit they may
have, nor the interests of spouse or
children except in circumstances
relating to shareholdings.
It is left to individual Members with
or without the advice of the
Registrar
that is the person responsible for
receiving the declaration of Members'
interests -
"to give the required information,
and any inconsistencies in style or
content that are apparent in the register
spring from that fact. Each Member is
responsible for what is recorded about
himself here as each is answerable to
his fellow Members and to the public.
The nine specific classifications
under which Members have been
required to register their interests
are:-
510
Ethics
remunerated directorships of
companies, public or private;
remunerated employment or
offices, ministerial office and
membership of the European
Parliament. . . do not need to be
registered..."
because of course that would be public
knowledge.
remunerated trades, professions or
vocations."
and it goes on giving some details.
"the nameslcompanies or other bodies
in which 4he Member has; to his
knowledge, either himself or with or
on behalf of his spouse of infant
children, a beneficial interest in
shareholdings of a nominal value
greater than one-hundredth of the
issued share capital."
That may not be relevant in this case,
but I quote this Mr. Speaker, purely to
give Members of this honourable House
an insight into what is this Register of
Members' Interests.
One is not required to make a detailed
public declaration of what one's assets
and liabilities are, but the register would
give vital information to the public as to
the nature of a Member's financial
interests and holdings, so that the public
would have some idea when a Member
is involved in debate—he would still be
required, no doubt, in any particular
debate under our code of ethics, to make
a declaration once he has a pecuniary
interest in respect of the matter being
debated—but the register would be there
for the public to have some idea as to
what the pecuniary interests of a
Member of this House are. And I think
511
Code of Friday, Istfuly, 1988
[HON. A. SMART]
it is all part of the effort on the part of
this Government to have openness, to
emphasize the importance of integrity in
public life.
3.00 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, there have been some
objections, arguments against the
question of whether Members should
register their interests, their pecuniary
interests and otherwise. I quote from a
report of the Royal Commission on
Standards in Public Life which report
was presented in the Parliament of
England in July, 1976. The Chairman of
that Commission was the Right Hon.
Lord Salmon. They were talking about
statutory compulsory requirements for
members of local government bodies in
England to register their interests. At
page 47 it says:
"The following objections may be
made to a statutory compulsory
register: It would not stop the
deliberate wrong-doer. It would not
give an up-to-date picture of the
interests of a councillor whose
holdings in securities or land change
frequently. It would create a
presumption of suspicion about the
affairs of councillors and would
amount to requiring them to prove
their own innocence. It would be an
intrusion on the reasonable privacy of
the councillor. It would be valuable
only as a public relations exercise.
And, perhaps most important, it
would deter potentially valuable
councillors from serving at all."
The Commission goes on to say:
"We do not dismiss these objections
lightly but we are satisfied that they
are outweighed by the substantial
512
Ethics
contribution to public confidence
which a carefully designed register
could make. It would help to show, in
conjunction with oral disclosure at
meetings, that councillors have
nothing to hide. It would help to
scotch the groundless suspicion which
malice can now attach to innocent
people. From the elector's point of
view the register would give a more
accessible picture of the member's
general background than the record of
specific disclosures at meetings and
would for that reason be a more
convincing demonstration of
openness."
Mr. Speaker, I adopt the arguments of
the Royal Commission and I want to
suggest to this honourable House that at
some later stage%consider whether we
would want to go that route. And in this
document that I hold in my hand, the
"Register of Members Interests", I
would just quote for you one or two
declarations of interests made by
Members. As I said, this document is
dated 12th January, 1987. I quote:
"David Alton, Member for
(Liverpool, Mossley Hill)
Trades and Professions:
Occasional articles, television
contributions and lectures.
The register also provides for
disclosure on visits overseas.
Overseas Visits: 1986, visit to
Nepal and China, sponsored by the
Christian Solidarity International;
1986, visit to Norway, sponsored
by the Norwegian Liberal Party;
1986, visit to the Far East
sponsored by the Hong Kong
government;
513
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
1986—visit to Oman sponsored
by the Oman Government.
There is another declaration by
Richard Alexander of Newark.
Directorships: Icepick Ltd.
(unremunerated)
Almawahe Ltd. (unremunerated)
Employment or Office: Consultant
to Jones Alexander &
Co. ,.Solicitors, Retford.
Consultant to Rindalbourne Ltd.
Trades or Professions: Solicitor
Overseas Visits: April 1986, visit
to New York and Washington for
six days as guest of British Airways
and British Tourist Authority, as
part of a delegation of Conservative
Backbench Tourism Committee.
There are other declarations. There
was one that I came across by a
gentleman—The Rt. Hon. Richard Luce
Shorehom—who in his declarations put
"Nil". So it appears that he has no trade
or profession, he has no interest in
companies, no directorships, no
financial sponsorships and things like
that.
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to note
that section 55(3) of our Constitution
provides for the powers, privileges and
immunities that are applicable to the
House of Commons in England. Our
Constitution was brought into effect in
1976. Section 55(3) says that those
powers, privileges and immunities will
apply to the Parliament of Trinidad and
Tobago until such time as the Parliament
itself prescribes for those powers,
privileges and immunities. I quote for
the benefit of hon. Members section
55(3) which says:
514
Ethics
"In other respects, the powers,
privileges and immunities of each
House and of the members and the
committees of each House, shall be
such as may from time to time be
prescribed by Parliament after the
commencement of this Constitution
and until so defined shall be those of
the House of Commons of the
Parliament of the United Kingdom and
of its members and committees at the
commencement of this Constitution."
So if we are entitled to the powers and
privileges and that was of 1976 and this
resolution of the House of Commons in
England was in 1974 for the
introduction of the Register of Members
Interests, if we can have the powers and
privileges maybe we can also have the
responsibilities.
And with those responsibilities that
we on this side are advocating and these
high standards of behaviour that we are
advocating /I want to suggest that in a
better time when this country has turned
around economically—and I have no
doubt that it will—one should look at
the question of the remuneration that
Members of this honourable House now
receive. Because as I insist we are
advocating the highest standards of
behaviour for the gentlemen of this
honourable House who are the leaders
of this country, who are responsible for
the fortunes—[Interruption] In this case
masculine includes the feminine—ladies
and gentlemen—who have an awesome
responsibility to lead this country. I am
afraid these ladies and gentlemen at this
stage carry a burden insofar as
remuneration is concerned that ought to
be alleviated when the time is right.
Now, this is not a complaint. We on this
515
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[HON. A. SMART]
side are happy to serve in the
circumstances in which we find
ourselves, and we consider it an honour
to serve. But when one finds that the
Ministers of the Government of Trinidad
and Tobago do not receive remuneration
and emoluments and perquisites equal to
persons at a lower level within the
Government of Trinidad and Tobago,
certainly there is just cause for looking
at the situation at a time—I emphasize
once more—when we are in a position
to do so.
3.10 p.m.
It is important that this be said because
I am afraid that sometimes one feels that
these things ought not to be voiced, but
if they are voiced properly and in the
proper context, I think the public of
Trinidad and Tobago will understand.
We on this side are prepared to make the
sacrifice, we are making it happily and
we will continue to do so in the interest
of the people of Trinidad and Tobago.
As we are on the question of
standards of behaviour, I crave your
indulgence in allowing me to drift just
slightly off course because I think it is
important that we deal with the question
of attitudes of certain persons in public
life. I want to focus particularly on the
question of the Labour Intensive
Development Programme. You shake
your head, Mr. Speaker, I thought I
should raise that just to indicate that
once systems are put in place for the
employment of persons as has been
done in the LID programme, you will
find that persons will understand that the
Member of Parliament is not the person
responsible for dispensing jobs and
dispensing largesse. Mr. Speaker, in the
LID programme-- because of the
516
Ethics
introduction of the computer systenine
is finding that the public at larg& has
come to understand—and this is an
indication that the attitudes of the people
of Trinidad and Tobago are changing
because of responsible leadership—that
one must not go to a Member of
Parliament for a job. But because
systems are in place, they are following
the system and understanding the
system and they know that they will be
fairly treated. That is an indication—I
think I am now back on course—that we
on this side are developing within the
population by our example of the
highest standards of integrity among the
public at large.
It is interesting to note that just a
couple days ago I was conversing with
the chairman of a statutory authority and
before the authority was the question of
employment of a high official in that
authority. That chairman was happy to
report to me. He said that the authority
had received a number of applications
and considered those applications and
not on one occasion was any
commissioner of that authority
approached by any member of the
Parliament, Government or Opposition.
Not one approach was made to that
authority in respect of the matter of
employment of the high official in that
authority.
I think that is an indication of the
direction in which the Government is
going. But of course it is not going to
happen overnight because I can give you
another anecdote of another person who
approached me. Again it was a question
of employment in a senior position in a
state enterprise. The person made his
application and sent it in, be it to the
517
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
chairman or whoever he had to send the
application to, but then he came to me
and gave me a copy of the application,
having already sent the original in as he
was required to do. He gave me a copy
of the application and asked me to pass
it on to the chairman, clearly indicating
to me that I should go and make some
representation on his behalf for the
purpose of getting that job. I was very
polite to him. I still have that
application. I have not approached that
chairman nor will I do so.
We are in the process of changing the
attitudes of the people of Trinidad and
Tobago. It is an extremely difficult job,
but if we the leaders of the country
demonstrate by our example a
willingness to be honest, to have
integrity, the population will follow. I
want to close by heartily supporting this
motion. I have no doubt that the entire
House will do so.
Thank you very much Mr. Speaker
Mrs. Muriel Donawa-McDavidson
(Lavenrille): Mr. Speaker, first of all I
should like to apologize for getting here
after the hon. Member for Tobago East
spoke on this motion. Just in case some
of the points that I will raise were
covered, I will wish him in his response
to deal with these points.
When one looks at the code of ethics
and listens attentively to some of the
submissions, particularly from the
Member for Diego Martin East, one is
reminded of all the masters of this
universe who came at various periods in
the life of mankind to draw to the
attention of the people the need for good
conduct, the need for morality and the
need for people to live together.
518
Ethics
Therefore, ethics is nothing new,
whether it is in the Koran, Hadith, the
Bible there is a guide. Apart from the
masters who came at various periods in
our lives and those who are with us at
present and followed by the leaders,
whether they be swamis, imams,
bishops, etc/in all religions and in all
walks of life,' they also talk about these
values.
If,therefore, coming from the
expressions from the hon. Member for
Tobago East, it is indicated that there are
problems with people who enter the
field of politics, then/obviously)-it is a
reflection of the value of the people of
the country at large. It is therefore very
important if in this very era in which all
of us live we are able to discover and
indicate their areas of weakness, one
must not give the impression that in
discussing these areas of weaknesses,
one is exempting oneself from areas of
weaknesses likewise.
Mr. Speaker, the People's National
Movement from its inception following
on the masters of the universe and
recognizing the necessity and need for
the highest ideals not only in public life,
but human behaviour generally,
emphasized and reiterated those
qualities. One of the main planks of the
People's National Movement w a s
morality in public affairs. The party was
of the view that in order to bring that
sense of value around it was important
to educate in order to emancipate. It
would mean therefore whether it is this
Government, the Government to come,
previous governments, whether it is this
country, a large country or small
country, it is obvious that one has to
work harder at the true and real values
which humanity possesses.
- -
/
 519
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[MRS. DONAWA-McDAVIDSON]
It seems therefore that it is very
necessary and essential for this
Government as well as the government
of the People's National Movement that
will be returned, to see what they might
do in order to encourage the teachings of
human values in all the schools of
Trinidad and Tobago. There is a good
old biblical saying which tells us that
one has to be trained in the way in
which one should grow—and this is in
reference to children—that when one
grows old it will not depart.
When one gives the impression that
Members of Parliament are corrupt
without any reference to those persons
in the community who might want to
corrupt the Members of Parliament, I
seem to have great difficulty in having
something done one-sidely. - any
; appeal for morality in public affair3(for
any form of code of ethics must be an
,i appeal not only to the Members of
Parliament, but to the society as a
whole.
Mr. Speaker, I have spent the greater
part of my life-32 years—in politics
and I have another 32 years to go: the
choice remains mine because it is going
to be a long time before I am short of
any change.
3.20 p.m.
I should like to ask a few questions.
But before I do so I go back to the
contribution my the hon. Member for
Diego Martin East. He gave a number of
definitions of politics. The definition
that I respect and love is a definition
given to me by the master and father of
the nation, Dr. Eric Eustace Williams,
who led this country politically very
successfully, not just to the completion
520
Ethics
of our independence but lifting the
quality of life of citizens generally. And
what he said to me was, that politics is
the art of all that is possible in the
interest of the development of the
citizens of Trinidad and Tobago and the
citizens of the world. I have followed
my politics in that context and I would
hope that this is the only real definition
for politics.
To assume that there are areas of
weaknessps among politicians is
unfortunate. I could not say that was the
intention because I did not hear the
debate from the very inception. But it is
human weakness, and it is human
weakness that we must rise above.
I have looked at the motion one or two
times and what occurred to me is that we
have established an Integrity
Commission and I am genuinely trying
to relate the reference to the Integrity
Commission and to the Integrity in
Public Life Act which the hon. Member
for Diego Martin East indicated was
proclaimed yesterday. What is the
relationship between the Integrity
Commission, the Integrity in Public Life
Act and the Code of Ethics for
Parliamentarians? I would have assumed
that if a code of ethics was to be brought
to Parliament, it would come from the
Integrity Commission. I am not certain
what the term parliamentarian, means,
whether it means parliamentarian in the
greatest context of Members of the
House of Representatives and/or
Members of the Senate. I would wait for
the clarification on that particular aspect.
Mr. Smart: Mr. Speaker, for the
information of the hon. Member for
Laventille, allow me to state that the
Parliament has to regulate its own affairs
521 522
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988 Ethics

so that one could not have an Integrity hon. Member for Port-of-Spain East—
Commission coming and voluntarily, or first of all I should indicate that all of us
without sanction of the law, telling the who listened to the hon. Member and
Members of Parliament what they his feelings behind his contribution,
should do and what they should not do. were clearly in the context of what one
I thought that I should clarify the doubts says as against what one does.
in the hon. Member's mind. [Interruption]
Mrs. Donawa-McDavidson: Mr. I am not disagreeing with him, but I
Speaker, again I have difficulty. If the am indicating that based on our
Commission cannot tell us what we discussions that we would support the
should do and what we should not do, code of ethics which, iqas explained to
then what is the purpose, or the value of me by the hon. Member for Diego
the Integrity Commission? Martin East, it is that those of us who
Mr. Smart: The Integrity are here in Parliament are establishing
Commission will receive from Members for ourselves a code of conduct as to
of Parliament in a confidential way— how we should proceed. Me hon. /

that information is not going to go out to Member for Diego Martin East—and I
the members of the public or to other noted with great interest—very politely
Members of Parliament—the details of indicated that at the right ti.aiig the need /

that parliamentarian's assets and for xke increases in salaries 'to Members
liabilities, what directorships he has, of Parliament/I would never miss an
what properties he owns and so on. opportunity t& also seek to ask this
Whereas what we are doing here, the Parliament, because I have got to live as
code of conduct, is stipulating for the every human person has to live, and I
Members among themselves a code of am due annual leave that I have worked
behaviour that they must adhere to, for 32 years of my life and I would hope
albeit voluntarily. that the hon. Member for Tobago East—
Mrs. Donawa-McDavidson: I going I think this is the last time that I am
had a little note here that these rules in I will to make my appeal in Parliament;
make it in public with a public
the code of ethics appear to me and are demonstration] I
following obviously on what my appropriate timè with a placard at the '
/

previous idea was, that it came as a club able to get $33,000 owedweek
every until I am I

or an organization that is putting rules pay that I worked for very hard,assoleave
to me
that
and regulations for itself. Is that the I can invest that money and assist other
similarity? I think that is the main
concernj Whether in fact we were doing people
avoid
who are seeking employment to
them from stealing and robbing
as other organizations, establishing rules and killing, and adding my little quota to
and regulations for ourselves which do that particular area.
not in any way interfere with what
would come out of the Integrity I should like therefore, since the hon.
Commission. Mcmhcr n,irtprl vr mrit-h tr% rlilatp that
ST S.?LSSLFS %#%4 J% LSAn.ISS, n.J SLtt.'tL%dSSttS.

In the light of that explanation, I am the greatest of all quotes for this
certain that after discussions with the particular time in our era, and I refer
523
Code of Friday, L t July, 1988
[MRS. DONAWA-McDAVIDSON]
specifically to Sri Satya Sai Baba who
warns the population that in your
expressions and your desires to
condemn others, to find weaknesses in
others, first of all you must do some
self-examination. And in doing that self-
examination, seek first of all to correct
those errors in yourself so that what you
say to others will have the necessary
inspiration, energy and vibrations. He
further warns us that money comes and
goes but morality comes and grows.
And since morality is an ideal, I would
expect that in every section of our
community, not only reflected in the
politicians, but reflected in the teaching
of the teachers—I do not know which
comes first, whether it is teaching the
teachers or teaching the children,
because the child is father to the man or
the man is something to the child. I do
not know which comes first.
3.30 p.m.
But I should like—Mr. Speaker,
because of this beautiful country that I
happened to be born in, where we have
in this country aeig the best people
that we can find in the whole universe—
us to guard our tongues in the utterances
we make in trying to condemn a past
regime and in 111ax trying to exalt
ourselves and putting down others. I
would like us to watch our words, our
actions, our thoughts and everything
about us so that what we say about
ourselves will not be believed by us and
believed by other people outside of
Trinidad and Tobago. This is a beautiful
place and I have repeated time and
again, I have a commitment and an
obligation to ensure that Trinidad and
Tobago remains beautiful. But to say
524
Ethics
something and to act otherwise, Mr.
Speaker, will not help any of us.
If therefore today, the hon. Member
for Tobago East is appealing to us in
Parliament to establish a code of ethics,
I hope that we will make every effort to
adhere to it, because any code that is
ideal may not be realized by any of us in
this House in our lifetime, for since the
birth and creation of man, man has been
striving for his own evolution which has
only just begun. Because man is much
more than he appears to be externally,
which is simply the costume that we
wear. And what really is man, as some
of the virtues alluded to by the Member
for Diego Martin East and some of those
values of courage, of determination, of
will power, of the desires to do wMeh is
good and relevant, of all these things
that we cannot see?
I do not believe that any one of us is
in a position to judge. The one judge
that we all have is Almighty Allah and
for. the Christians, Almighty God. What
I would urge,/what we do means more
than what w say; how we act, the tone"
of our voices that would help to be an
inspiration and a guide for the rest of the
nation to follow. I would look forward
therefore, Mr. Speaker, that after today
in this honourable Parliament, Members
will temper what they have to say. In
their desire to attack and condemn they
can say the same thing in a completely
different manner. They can use the
approach of persuasion, of inspiration
and of encouragement and they should
use the school and the media, instead of
using the media for a lot of the things
that we have, for the motivation, the
encouragement and the inspiration of the
citizens of Trinidad and Tobago.
525
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
We are in very challenging times and
this nation would, in fact, need the
support of each and every one of us and
when, therefore, the Member for Port-
of-Spain East talks with such feeling, it
is because he is relating to a large extent
what is said as against what is
demonstrated from how he perceives it
and how many people in Trinidad and
Tobago perceive it. I therefore, Mr.
Speaker, would like to support the code
of ethics and to note that from where I
sit, since the great exemplars are on the
other side, that you know I have a
whole pile of information here with me
but it just fell down. I am sure it fell
because the information that is now
there would be properly addressed,
when I should have raised those matters
in the Parliament of Trinidad and
Tobago.
I hope that whelT they are brought to
the Parliament of Trinidad and Tobago,
the Members opposite will take the
observations in the spirit that they are
made and carefully examine them. They
are having a dose of their own medicine
as parliamentarians, who when, because
of propaganda, misrepresentation, half
truths, semi-truths, without finding the
cause and what is at the base of some
allegations—while it is good to get
information, one also has to be very
cautious of the very persons who bring
the information to you. Because the old
people have a saying that tells you, one
hand cannot clap and it takes two to
tango or two to create a conversation.
I therefore hope that all of us today
would look upon this code of ethics and
its intention and first of all begin 1the
implementation of this code of ethics not
by looking at what others are doing but
526
Ethics
by demonstrating that code of ethics so
that one can look at you and recognize
that there is something different about
you than there is about other people.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Minister Without Portfolio
(Dr. Hon. Bhoendradatt
Tewarie): Mr. Speaker, I had no
intention whatsoever of speaking on this
motion, but I rise to support the motion
and to respond to some of the statements
of the Member for Port-of-Spain East.
The Member for Laventille spoke of the
spiritual masters and referred to the
kingdom of what you might call the
other world. A Cuban writer has written
a novel called the Kingdom of This
World and it is because we live in the
kingdom of this world—
Mrs. Donawa-McDavidson: Mr.
Speaker, I made no reference to the
kingdom of another world. Everything
I have said here today is about the
kingdom of this very world in which I
happen to be living. I simply drew
examples of what is being said today
that was said of previous masters of
other periods. I never spoke about
worlds. I spoke about other periods in
time including now, present, today.
Dr. Tewarie: I stand corrected. The
intention was not to get into an argument
with the hon. Member over the kingdom
of the other world or the kingdom of
this world, but it is because we live here
in the kingdom of this world—
Mrs. Donawa-McDavidson: Mr.
Speaker, there has not been one single
time in my discourse today when I made
reference to any kingdom.
Dr. Tewarie: Mr. Speaker, I will
depart from that line. And I wish to say
527
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[HON. B. TEWARIE]
that because we live in a society of
ordinary men and ordinary mortals, and
in which at various points in time some
govern and others are governed and
some are entrusted to higher office at
various points in time, there is need for
rules, guidelines, and codes and so on.
A code of ethics for parliamentarians or
for Ministers is no different in a sense
from a code of ethics for any other
segment of the population or codes
which govern any other institution in a
society.
3.40 p.m.
But the difference is that a code of
ethics for parliamentarians and Ministers
of Government is a code of ethics for
those who govern and those who wield
power and those who make laws, and as
a result the code of ethics is for those
who, in fact, wield power and influence
in the society. As a consequence, if you
start with codes at the top and if you and
fix ethics at the top, chances are this
mood will be reflected lower down in
the society, step by step, tier by tier and
in the end you can have a society, based
not only on order, or on reason, or even
on justice, but you can have a society in
which there are such things as values
and a sense of right and wrong.
Perhaps, you can say that we were
part and parcel of the world of 1986 and
the making of it because we were
present, but we did not have control
before and the world as we found it after
1986 was a world that was not made in
our image, and we cannot be
responsible for that time, we can only be
responsible for now and as a result we
have introduced a code of ethics in
keeping with the commitment in our
party's manifesto. The manifesto states
528
Ethics
that we will prepare and present to
Parliament legislation to establish an
Integrity Commission as required by the
Constitution—which has been done;.to
introduce a register of gifts which is in
keeping with the same tenor and
intention of that legislation and to
introduce a code of ethics for Members
of Cabinet, Parliamentarians, public
servants etc. Today we have come with
the code of ethics for Cabinet and the
parliamentarians. So this is in fulfilment
of our manifesto. And I want to state
here that I have a copy of the manifesto,
the Local Government Elections
manifesto, the Constitution of Trinidad
and Tobago and the constitution of the
party to which I belong, the National
Alliance for Reconstruction. A file is
made of these because they are
important documents to which w e
subscribe and by which, in a sense, we
are governed. In fulfilment of one of the
positions we took in the manifesto this
code of ethics has been brought to
Parliament.
I must say that I came to Parliament
today in a rather good mood but I
became rather upset that the Member for
Port of Spain East would use the debate
and this Parliament to raise the issue
about my being Minister without
portfolio and General Secretary of the
party. I consider it very cheap politics to
raise the issue here in Parliament, first
of all, because as he himself sai4/it was
raised elsewhere by Members' of his
own party; an secondly, because it has
got some pulic play in various media.
The reason it is raised here is that the
Member must intend that it becomes part
of the public record, therefore I feel it it
important that I respond.
 529
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
The Prime Minister, of any country
under the system by which we are
governed, has full authority under the
Constitution to select members of his
Cabinet and to appoint his Cabinet and
he may chose to give them portfolios or
not to give them portfolios; and that is a
fact of our system. Members of a
political party who sit on the executive
of that party are people who are elected
by the members of their party to serve in
that particular position as party officials
or party leaders or party functionaries so
that they may do work in the interest of
the party and on behalf of its members.
There is no incompatibility between a
person holding an office in the political
party and a person holding a Cabinet
post in Government with or without
portfolio. I want to make that point first
of all. In fact, the very system which we
have inherited and which we are
evolving is a system of party
government. There are books that you
can read about it; one is The problem of
"party government, for instance; a copy
of which I have here. They are not
incompatible and I will illustrate the
case.because so much of what passes
for politics is simply mischief and so
much of the mischief that is part and
parcel of the politics gains currency in
the society and as a result of that it
begins to influence public opinion.
Therefore, it is important for me to
respond to this matter.
There is no incompatibility between a
person holding high office in a political
party and a person holding high office in
Government. There are various systems
of government, there are some in which
the party is of little consequence in the
governmental system; there are some in
which the party is dominant in the life of
530
Ethics
the Government; there are many courses
in between those two extremes and we
in our time are simply evolving our own
model. The party system in this country,
you must know in reality, only came to
this country in 1956 and we have never
in a real sense had a two-party system as
is understood under the system of
parliamentary democracy, and we may
have that system, we may evolve into
another system, we may evolve out of
this one,I we do not know what the
future holds, but the point I am trying to
make is that the lines that you are
drawing and the positions that you are
taking are not informed by any rationale
that I can see. I think it is incumbent
upon us as parliamentarians and people
who are aspiring to leadership in the
country to speak and act on the basis of
information and it is not hard to acquire
information. There are books that are
available, there are systems to read
about and ours is a new society in a
world that is thousands of years old and
has inherited systems that are very old.
We cannot continue to play cheap
politics at the expense and at the risk of
misleading the population.
The second thing I want to say is that
there are many members of the political
party to which I belong who are also
members of Cabinet and hold posts in
the party and the issue never became an
issue before the General Secretary was
made a Minister without portfolio. The
reason is very simple and the reason it
became an issue is that at the time the
General Secretary was paid for the job
of General Secretary. When I was
General Secretary and a Member of
Parliament without any ministerial
responsibility or appointment, I enjoyed
an income from both the Parliament of
531 532
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988 Ethics
[HON. B. TEWARJE]
this country as a parliamentary explain the policy especially to those
representative and an income from the who are critical of it."
party. I do not know if that is your own It goes on to talk about the party
case, Mr. General Secretary of the conference and so on. So the first thing
Peoples' National Movement. that it does iséstab1ishes
( as a party amember
link between
Mr. Speaker: Perhaps you might functioning and
functioning as a Minister.
end up in a row if you do not address You see, that is the problem. [Interruption]
the Chair.
At page 237 of the same book states:
Dr. Tewarie: Yes, I am sorry. I
realize I had run afoul of the Speaker. "Subject to minor qualifications, the
But once I was appointed to the Cabinet Prime Minister has a completely free
I immediately wrote to the Treasurer of hand in selecting his Cabinet."
my party, and that is documented, that I Some Ministers are with portfolio others
would accept no salary for the post, are without portfolio and these are also
understanding that in becoming a included if he chooses. The Prime
Cabinet member I could not morally Minister can also create new
accept compensation from any other departments and so on.
source. So that was done. Mr. Marshall: Mr. Speaker,
As I said before, the Prime Minister is through you, the Member is clearly
at liberty to appoint a Minister with or missing the point that we are making
without portfolio. I did not have the time here. I am being sincere. No one is
to prepare for the debate but in politics questioning the Prime Minister's
one ought to always be prepared. prerogative to appoint Ministers with or
Through you, Mr. Speaker, for the without portfolio. That is clear. That is
benefit of the Member for Port-of-Spain his prerogative. He can appoint them
East and also for all those who may be without portfolio, he can dismiss them,
listening, I simply want to read a few that is his prerogative. That is clear. We
paragraphs from this book, The British understand that. No one is questioning
Constitution and Politics which is about the role or the relationship between a
the system that we have modified and member of Cabinet and his party. That,
which is the system that we operate too, is clear.
today: Dr. Tewarie: What are you
"A Minister has various forms of questioning?
responsibility. He is usually an MP Mr. Marshall: What we are
and, like any other MP, he must visit questioning quite emphatically is the fact
his constituents, attend to their needs that the Member is holding a full time
and strike a balance between national position in his party and he is being paid
and local interests. As a leading with public funds to do so. Clearly that
member of his party, he will have to could never happen in the Peoples'
attend party committees, assist in the National Movement. That is the point.
formulation of party policy, and That is what we want you to deal with.
533
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
Dr. Tewarie: That is a serious
problem. It is a serious problem that is
involved here. Maybe I should not say
what I should really say. But this is a
serious problem. From your point of
view, reasonably, would the situation be
resolved if the Minister without
Portfolio were made a Minister to whom
a portfolio is assigned and he continues
as General Secretary of the party?
Would the problem be solved? Of
course, because then in your perception
I would be paid for an assignment, a
portfolio that I have been assigned. For
instance the chairman of the ruling party
is the Minister of National Security, he
works no less then I as chairman of the
party. He works very hard in the interest
of the party while he functions as
Minister of National Security and he is
paid a Minister's salary. [Interruption] I
shall give way once.
Mr. Marshall: Mr. Speaker, justice
must not only be done but it must also
seen to be done. The chairman of his
party is not holding a full time position
in his party. The position of chairman is
not a full time position. The position of
General Secretary is a full time position.
And we are saying that if you accept
one cent from the public purse to do
your work as General Secretary it is
immoral. That is the point that we are
making. Deal with that issue.
Dr. Tewarie: I am not receiving one
cent to do any work of the party. I am
receiving a salary as a Minister of
Government and I do my work as a
Minister of Government. One of my
responsibilities.
Mr. Marshall: It was set up that
way—
534
Ethics
Mr. Speaker: When you are making
an address face the Chair, address the
Speaker, forget everyone else.
Dr. Tewarie: Mr. Speaker, that is
good advice and I shall take it. I shall
leave that at this point, except to simply
say that the Member for Port-of-Spain
East, in making his allegations and in
casting aspersion, is on very weak
ground and it is simply on political
ground that he stands because he knows
that the information is not available. I
can state here one of my responsibilities,
I want to say to you, as has been done
in other places with other Ministers
without portfolio, part of our very
tradition, is to make the Minister without
Portfolio the Leader of Government
Business which is a function that I
perform here. And there are other things
that one does as a Cabinet Minister. But
that is irrelevant. But the point I am
making to you is that the payment is for
the appointment of a Minister. If I
choose to do party work, if I choose to
serve my party, I am elected by my
party by a vast majority to be the
General Secretary of this party for three
years and in three years time my party
will decide again who is to be and who
is not to be General Secretary and that is
fine. That is party business, this is
Government business.
All this is raised in the context in
which an issue like that which is a non-
issue but has explosive value is used as
a means of undermining a very serious
motion here. A motion which seeks
simply to establish rules of conduct, if
you like, for the highest office holders
in the land.
I want to say that in establishing this it
is perhaps useful to refer to one fact that
535
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[HON. B. TEWARIE]
I know for sure about the economic
situation of the country and that is that in
1972 when the poverty line of this
country was calculated at $161 per
month, 25 per cent of the population
was deemed to be living below the
poverty line. And in 1987 although the
poverty line was raised to $1,100 in
keeping with inflationary trends there is
still 25 per cent of the population living
under the poverty line. The reason I
make that point is to indicate that if you
look at the people who have remained at
the poverty line and below and you look
at some of the people who served in the
last regime you will see by contrast their
economic condition improved a s
opposed to the people within the system
who remained under that poverty line.
4.00 p.m
But there is no evidence that I can
adduce here because I do not have the
evidence, but what I can say is that the
reality is glaring and stares one in the
face, and because of that it is important
to give signals to the population and to
give signals to the people in the
Parliament and to give signals even to
the Ministers who govern, that there are
rules by which this country is going to
be governed and that we are serious
about things like that. Because you see,
the quality of any society is determined
in large measure by the examples of
those at the top. And men and women
will be men and women, frail and mortal
and ordinary, they are not divine and as
a result one needs to have rules, one
needs to establish guidelines and so on
[Interruption] To all men, all
men.[Interruption] We all have the
divine spark thougV it is the only thing
that makes life 'orthwhi1e. Some
536
Ethics
people have a natural propensity to
good, some to evil, most of us struggle
to find the mean course and to choose
good in the end.
The point is that codes of ethics such
as this one are necessary in the arena of
government, because a government
comes out of the practice of politics and
involves politicians. And all over the
world, Mr. Speaker, politicians are
people who are suspect and politics is a
field of endeavour that people look upon
with skepticism, sometimes with
disdain. And the problem of politics and
government to anyone who is serious
about society, and about building a
decent and humane society, is how to
give credibility to the system of
government, how to give a certain
amount of credibility to the arena of
politics so that people will not choose to
give up on the kingdom of this world,
and begin to think that the kingdom of
this world is just a time you pass until
you can enter the kingdom of the other
world. In order words, to make Jife
meaningful and reasonable for the
ordinary people in the kingdom of this
world, it is necessary that people believe
that at least in some places in politics
and among some governments or among
some members in government, there is
such a thing as integrity. And that is
why these things are so important, Mr.
Speaker.
I would say through you, Mr.
Speaker, to the Member for Port-of-
Spain East, that the issue he raised is not
only irrelevant, but needless, and
politically, I think while he may have
scored a point or hopes that he àf1, he
must know in his heart that there is no
issue really, when he raises the issue of
537
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
my being a Minister and being an officer
of the party.
But one of the problems in our society
and in societies such as ours, I think, is
an unwillingness and an inability
sometimes, which stems not from lack
of ability but because of the barriers that
we create in nor looking squarely at our
own problems and trying to solve them
and therefore trying to evolve a system
and a method that is truly our own. We
are quick to quote precedents of the past
and that is permissible of course, but we
are evolving a system of our own, we
come out of somewhere but we are
going somewhere too, and we are quick
to go for the political kill, when in fact
what is required of us as leaders and as
people who have been given a mandate
to lead or an opportunity to offer
leadership, is that we rise to the
occasion and to the opportunity. And
instead of going for the quick politics,
one should begin to use that opportunity
given to one to build and to lead and to
educate and to carry the society forward.
If we fail in our own dealings with each
other at this level, then we cannot
possibly succeed in establishing
reasonable relations with the rest of the
society.
So, Mr. Speaker, I thank you and this
House for the opportunity to say a few
words on this matter. I support the code
of ethics and this motion brought by the
hon. Prime Minister before this House.
I am saddened by the needless attack
made on me by the Member for Port-of-
Spain East and I hope that in future,
instead of simply being passionate about
everything—every time he gets up he is
in a rage about something—every issue
he feels equally intense about—I hope
538
Ethics
that he would be a little more selective, a
little more restrained and more than that,
be a little more mindful of the fact that
being here requires that one rise to the
responsibility of leadership and evolve
out of the realm of mischief and spite.
I thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Kelvin Ramnath (Couva
South): Mr. Speaker, I want to assure
the Member for Caroni East who
seemed very touched this afternoon, that
1 would be dealing with what is to me a
very serious matter, and not with
matters which are of a domestic nature,
as to whether one gets salary or does
not, or one holds two jobs.
I want first of all to state that I have no
problem with rules. I think the problem
we have in Trinidad and Tobago is that
we do not have rules and certain people
make rules for themselves and are
guided by those rules. So that the
establishment of a code of ethics and
rules by which people are bound would
certainly go a long way in ensuring that
people know what they must do, what
they must not do and they know very
well the penalties and punishments and
rewards associated with matters of this
kind. I want to caution, however, Mr.
Speaker, as a member of the ruling
part y—[Interruption] For the benefit of
my friend from Oropouche let me state
that I am not suspended from the party,
I am a member of the party that is in
government. [Interruption] I should like
your protection, Mr. Speaker.
4.10 p.m.
I want to caution that we do not
attempt to emulate the PNM in our out-
pourings of concern for morality in
public affairs and integrity in public life
541
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
to parliamentary democracy, to the
functioning of Parliament since this code
of ethics is intended to be observed by
all parliamentarians. You cannot on the
one hand say that Members of the
House of Representatives must accept or
are encouraged to accept these
provisions an(on the other hand have
no means of establishing a code of
ethics for members of the Senate.
Because really they are no different in
terms of their responsibilities. The only
difference is that they could receive the
same kind of treatment such as the one I
received and be removed—they can be
removed from the Senate. So that in
matters of these kinds, matters which
affect the conduct of politicians, what is
desirable is to establish a joint select
committee of both Houses and to receive
recommendations from that committee
which would by and large be
unanimously accepted when it goes that
way. I have good reason to believe that
this code of ethics if introduced in the
other place will not see the light of day
as the integrity legislation under the last
government did not see the light of day.
Because there were parliamentarians
who were committed to not having
integrity legislation passed. So the point
I am making is that we may very well be
paying lip service with one half of our
parliamentary system supporting the
code of ethics and the other half saying
no.
So that, Mr. Speaker, I want to
recommend the establishment of a joint
select committee and at a later stage of
my address I shall move the necessary
amendment. I feel quite sure it will
receive the support of the majority.
I want to emphasize, as the
Representative for Diego Martin East
542
Ethics
also emphasized, that Parliament is a
self-regulating body. Like other
professions we create the rules under
which we operate. And if we are going
to accept these rules that have been
placed before us it is my view that a
joint select committee of both Houses
will be the best type of mechanism for
reviewing what has come before the
Parliament from the executivfand at that
stage the parliamentarians themselves
will make their own regulations, and
they will be morally bound by those
regulations. When a joint select
committee recommends a code of ethics
for all Members of Parliament no one
can say that he is not morally and
otherwise bound by it because some
executive handed it down and used its
majority in the Parliament to approve it.
But this is exactly what is happening in
this case. And one must be careful that
we do not see an abuse of privilege. The
executive must report to the Parliament.
That is one of the major responsibilities
of the executive—that he reports to
Parliament; he is accountable to the
Parliament. Although the Prime
Minister, as stated and elaborated by the
Member for Caroni East, has the power
to hire and fire, the Parliament also has
the power to hire and fire—Member for
St. Ann's West. We can say that we do
not want the Prime Minister. That is
why the executive is accountable to us.
Now, Mr. Speaker, how on the one
hand can you be accountable to the
Parliament and on the other hand you
impose on the Parliament rules by which
that organization must function? It is
immoral to do that. The Government
will probably be accused of muzzling
the Parliament. I would suggest that
they prevent that accusation from being
543
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[MR. RAMNATH]
made. Because the accusation may be
made very shortly that there is an
attempt to muzzle the Parliament to
which the executive must report by
using the majority that the Government
has in the Parliament. We must avoid
that. When people have to obey rules
which regulate their own profession
they must agree to those rules, not in the
form that is taken today when a motion
comes.
4.20 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, this code of ethics is
government's policy. The motion before
us is a government motion, but it should
have been moved by a backbencher
through Westminster parliamentary
democracy style. I have been attending
CPA meetings, I have not heard much of
what is happening with CPA these days,
but these are matters that are discussed
at the CPA level. This is really not a
matter for the executive, it is a matter for
all parliamentarians. So I suggest that,
we go that way.
I was on the point of the Standing
Orders. I was looking at one of the
Standing Orders on page 91 and I shall
read this to support my argument:
"No Member of the House shall
appear before the House or any
committee thereof as Counsel or
Solicitor for any party or in any
capacity for which he is to receive a
fee or reward."
So the Standing Orders already make
provision in one case with respect to
remuneration You may wish the
Standing Order to state that no Member
of the Government should prosecute in a
court of law in Trinidad and Tobago.
That may be desirable because it is the
544
Ethics
feeling that a Government
parliamentarian should not prosecute in
a matter before the courts of the country.
Because the Government is the
complainant, so one does not want the
magistracy or the judiciary to feel
uncomfortable: that before those
distinguished people is a member of the
elected government asking the courts to
do certain things. That might be
something that we may wish to include
in the code of ethics, but we can only do
that when we sit down as
parliamentarians and participate in
drawing up the rules which govern our
profession.
Mr. Speaker, if we look at another
section—Contents of Speeches—on
page 37, we shall see that there are
provisions with respect to comments on
matters where a judicial decision is
pending. You will see that you cannot
impute improper motives to Members of
either Chamber or to the Queen. Her
Majesty's name or the Governor
General's name shall not be used to
influence the House. These are rules.
The conduct of Her Majesty, Members
of the Senate or House of
Representatives, or of judges or other
persons shall not be raised. The conduct
of Her Majesty and Members of the
Royal Family shall not be called in
question. These rules are already here
and they are outdated rules. What we
need to do is to put this code of ethics in
the rules, that is what has to be done.
The Standing Orders will have to be
amended and these specific provisions
put in if this code of ethics is to mean
anything and to have any teeth; and for
that matter for the public to feel certain
that we are not simply attempting to do a
public relations job. I feel that the time
 545
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
has come when matters of this kind
should be referred to the Standing
Orders Committee, rather than simply
asking the Parliament to approve this
code of ethics.
I want to say much more about the
enhancement of public confidence in the
integrity of parliamentarians. There is
another point that I want to deal with
which is whether the population
expected that the NA/code of ethics
would be one for parliamentarians and
Ministers of the NAR. So that in
attempting to achieve integrity in public
life we will set a code of ethics for our
members to follow. Because Mr.
Speaker, I do not think it is the intention
to impose an NAR code of ethics on
what is left of the PNM. We should
involve them—the small number that
they are today, and the significant
division on a matter of such fundamental
importance which exists today—in
discussing here and elsewhere this
whole question of the acceptability of
these codes. And in the event that there
is another significant Opposition party at
some other time in the Parliament of
Trinidad and Tobago as we had during
198 1-1986, one that was responsible for
keeping the Government on its toes and
on whose backs the new organization
was formed and went into government.
The hon. Member for Tobago West
will agree with me that from 198 1-1986
she was proud to be a member of that
body, but that is beside the point. The
fact of the matter is that you must have
agreement from the Opposition on a
matter of this nature.
4.30 p.m: Sitting suspended.
5.00 p.m: Sitting resumed
546
Ethics
Mr. Kelvin Ramnath: Mr.
Speaker, when we took the
adjournment, I was about to mention
other aspects of the conduct of
parliamentarians which can affect public
confidence in the integrity of
parliamentarians. Before I deal with
that, I simply want to state that we have,
in Trinidad and Tobago, two major
pieces of legislation which were enacted
during the term of office of this
Government. One is the Prevention of
Corruption Ordinance which specifically
deals with using one's office corruptly.
And there are certain very serious
penalties associated with the corrupt use
of public office. It is not only confined
to Members of Parliament.
The other piece of legislation is the
Integrity in Public Life Act which sets
up an Integrity Commission. And we
are told today that the Act is in force. So
that the Integrity Commission would
now be in a position to obtain from
Members of Parliament information.
The only problem with that legislation,
or the role of the Integrity Commission
is that that information would be kept
secret. so that the public will not be in a
position to determine the state of affairs
of a parliamentarian as produced to the
Integrity Commission.
A Minister of Government is not only
under scrutiny with respect to his role as
a Minister and his private interests; he is
under public scrutiny with respect to the
role of departments of government and
state enterprises which fall within his
portfolio. And in many cases when
something goes wrong in a department
of government or in a state enterprise,
when there are allegations of corruption,
ultimately the blame falls on the political
 547
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[MR. RAMNATH]
head, who is the Minister of
Government. And if we are to work
towards the enhancement of public
confidence in the integrity of
parliamentarians, we have to ensure that
we put in place a very rigid system that
would enable those people who are
more powerful than Ministers, in terms
of exercising certain public functions.
People who administer huge state-
owned corporations for that matter.
The Member for Diego Martin East
spoke about his experience in dealing
with the Chairman of the Statutory
Authorities Services Commission and he
indicated that in speaking to the
Chairman—
Mr. Smart: On a point of order. I
made no mention of the Chairman of the
Statutory Authorities Service
Commission. I did not identify the
Authority of which I spoke. The
Member for Couva South knows that
very well.
Mr. Ramnath: I most humbly
apologize to the Member for Diego
Martin East, but the point I was making
has nothing to do with the particular
Commission. He was making the point
that he was in conversation with the
chairman of a certain authority who
indicated to him that for the first time,
members of the Commission were not
lobbying—if I may use my o w n
words—for appointment of certain
individuals.
Perhaps in the case of that particular
Chairman, you have in that Chairman a
person who is deeply concerned about a
meritocracy, who is concerned about
equality and justice and fair play in the
548
Ethics
allocation of employment opportunities
to the general public.
But what I am saying is that by simply
introducing a code whereby Members
must state what is likely to be a conflict
with respect to their role a s
parliamentarians or Ministers and their
private interests, will not, in fact,
achieve the objective of bringing about
that confidence in our politicians which
is desirable. We need to do much more.
This is not the opportunity to deal with
the administration of government-run
organizations. I am quite sure that the
opportunity will arise soon for us to
debate what takes place in those
organizations in the light of the
difficulties that they are experiencing
with respect to finance and
administration. What I am saying is that
we ought to look also at what is likely to
impact on the politician and that you
cannot be expected to take blame as a
politician for what other people do.
5.10 p.m.
I want to say, Mr. Speaker, that we in
this Government are doing exactly what
the PNM Ministers did, and that is we
have a tendency not to deal openly with
those people who should be dealt with. I
am not suggesting that there is any
attempt at a cover up. I am saying that
there is a tendency, if something goes
wrong in a particular department of
government, to choose the easiest way
and not say too much about it. The
problem arises when you do not say
anything about it and nothing is done
eventually.
So that, a lot of people ar/still strutting
around the place behaving as though
they have no responsibility to Ministers
 549
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
of Government, or no accountability to
the Government and run their
enterprises and departments as if the
politicians were there only for a short
period of time only to perform certain
functions at the top and below that, it is
their domain. And in the final analysis,
it is the Minister who has to take
responsibility for what takes place, the
success, the failure, the corruption, the
employment practices, whatever takes
place. The Ministers have to be prepared
to deal with that. Because in the
process, we all shall have to bear the
responsibility for the success or failure.
We shall all have to take the blame for
the absence of integrity in public life.
And I imagine that we shall see at
some later stage some kind of codes or
rules by which all persons involved in
public life will be governed. And I hope
that that is imminent, Mr. Speaker,
because there are a lot of people in this
country who feel that everything is over
now as far as what they thought would
happen when a new Government took
office. They feel that we have returned
to complacency, we have returned to the
original position, where they do what
they want and politicians condone that
behaviour. But also to enhance public
confidence in the integrity of
parliamentarians, Mr. Speaker, we must
look at what happens outside of the
Parliament with the conduct of Members
of Parliament outside of the Parliament
Chamber.
I want to ask the question, does public
confidence in the integrity of Members
of Parliament only develop by what
takes place in the Parliament? The
obvious answer, Mr. Speaker, is no.
We cannot escape that, in this society,
550
Ethics
there is and there has been serious
personal vilification of people in public
life. I sat on the same benches with the
Prime Minister in 1976. For those who
recently joined the Parliament, I think it
is important they should know that. And
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister, then
the Member for Tobago East and still the
Member for Tobago East, could not help
but talk about his own experiences, the
vilification, character assassination,
harassment, instituted by people
occupying senior public office in this
country, the fact that he had to sleep in
different houses, the fact that he was
hounded down by the police, his own
experiences, Mr. Speake/with respect
to the neglect of his constituency.
We spoke about those things. And
certainly the integrity of
parliamentarians at that time was called
into question with respect to their
conduct. I have had my own share of
personal vilifications and I am not
talking about people on the streets. I
expect that as a politician you will get
that kind of treatment sometimes on the
outside. I am talking of people engaging
and indulging in the lowest acts possible
by human beings, virtually lying to
people in an attempt to destroy m y
character and to destroy me. I have had
my share of the security services, Mr.
Speaker, hounding me across this
island. The first time I received so much
attention from the security in my life is
when I was out of office. And when I
inquired, people told me they are paid to
do a certain job and they have to do it.
Every motor car that is parked in front
of my house at night is recorded and
they tell me they have to do it. I have
friends who speak to me about the
551
Code of Friday, 1 tJuly, 1988
[MR. RAMNATH]
activities of the security services with
respect to my own activities. And when
the public is fed with information which
they know in their hearts and in their
bones is not true and that information
goes down to the oil fields where I
work, that information goes throughout
the country in the Chamber in Port-of-
Spain—you may be surprised to know I
have friends in the Chamber—about
corruption, about bribe/taking, about
payoffs, Mr. Speaker, and that
information is being fed from very high
offices in the country.
People from the CPTU will tell me that
I sent a man to take a bribe from Union
Carbide—from the CPTU—when the
only dealing I have had with a company
like that is through Mr. Bruce Procope
who was the agent who came to me as
Minister of Energy and said that 'I am
the agent for the company in Trinidad.' I
am not at all suggesting any improper
motives on the part of Mr. Procope.
When people in high office carry out
that kind of vilification and character
assassination, how do you expect to
enhance the integrity of
parliamentarians? When senior people in
Government will stand up, Mr.
Speaker, and say 'Up came Ramnath
with a proposal to hand over the project
to Amoco', knowing that that was not
true, knowing that I was working on the
advice of senior technocrats o f
government—reports are there, Mr.
Speaker, it is documented—but
conveying the impression that I had a
special deal going with Amoco.
5.20 p.m.
You do not expect them to say,
"PNM/NAR all of them are the same
thing, all of them tief"? That is what
552
Ethics
they are saying about us because there
are people who are supposed to be
credible, who hold important public
office indulging in this kind of
whispering campaign. This is not the
time to go into details, there is a lot I
have to say, like the Prime Minister had
to say when he was in the Opposition
benches be+een 1976 about the
treatment he'received from a former
administration.
I recognize, like the Member for
Caroni East, the constitutional right of
the Prime Minister to chose his Cabinet.
I have no problem with that. I have no
problem with not being a Member of the
Cabinet, I did not have a problem of
taking my car and going back to Penal
as a junior engineer for a company that
many people assumed was under my
portfolio when I was a Minister. There
are many who cannot do that. I
understand the role of the Prime
Minister in this system of govemment
but what I do not understand in this
system of government is people in high
office indulging in the worst forms of
behavior.
My colleagues have all received the
same kind of treatment. How do you
develop code of ethics to deal with that
situation? That is the cancer in the
society today, that is where the problem
lies, the rumomongering, the campaign
of hate, and when you respond you are
treated as though you are the attacker.
You must not respond, you must sit
down and let the whole country believe
that you were dismissed from the
Cabinet because you were a thief. That
is what they have been saying—people
in very high positions.
553
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
They went so far as to say that I
embarrassed the Government by not
paying my light bills, and much more.
Involvement in drugs. if people know
who the drug barons are and who are
making the trouble in his country, let us
do something about it. You know what
hurts me? You can say a lot about Mr.
Panday, the Member for Couva North,
but to spread a campaign that he is
involved in drugs! Ministers of
government are rumour/mongering and
we want to enhance the image of
parliamentarians!
I remember your own case, not as
Speaker, but as the Member of
Parliament, it was not by this
Government, but the campaign launched
against the Member for Tabaquite, I do
not intend to compromise your position
as Speaker...
Mr. Speaker: The speaking time of
the hon. Member has expired.
Motion made, That the hon.
Member's speaking time be extended by
30 minutes. [Mr. R. Palackdharrysingh]
Question put and agreed to.
Mr. Ramnath: Mr. Speaker, I never
thought that I would have felt the same
way as you felt just before the last
general election when throughout this
country a campaign that the Member for
Tabaquite was dealing with drug
pushers, was involved in pedalling
drugs, was seen in the house of Dole
Chadee. Affidavits were sworn and sent
to the political leader of the party, the
news went around the country, and the
people saw all of us as a bunch of
gangsters, rogues and vagabonds and
thought we were no different. That is
the problem that we must deal with, not
1
554
Ethics
for our sake, not to vindicate the
Member for Couva South, or yourself,
or the Prime Minister with respect to the
accusations that have been made about
us and the Member for St. Augustine.
No effort was spared to destroy the
integrity and character of the Member
for St. Augustine. if he is unsuitable to
be a Minister of Government because he
does not wish to conform, every body
knows that he is a fiercely independent
person and sometimes that does not go
down too well, fire him; if I was
incompetent as a Minister of Energy,
you fire me for incompetence/ but no
\
effort was spared to destAby the
character and integrity of the Member
for St. Augustine. That he was seeking
a contract for a friend, that he was
corrupt, that he attempted to violate
certain procedures. It was not necessary
at all because they all will make
mistakes, if mistakes were made. They
all have made mistakes, but let us find
good reasons. The population will thank
you for firing Kelvin Ramnath for good
reasons, and say that we have made
political progress in Trinidad and
Tobago where no man in indispensable
and cannot hold the political leader to
ransom. if we proceed along those lines
the population, in the final analysis, will
say that Members are to behave in a
certain way so as to enhance public
confidence in the integrity of
parliamentarians.
Mr. Speaker, I propose an amendment
to the motion and that is to remove the
words "adopt" in the first line and
replace it by the word "refer"; and to add
after "1988" the words "to a joint select
committee of Parliament". The motion,
as amended, would read:
555 556
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988 Ethics
[MR. RAMNATH]
"Be it resolved, that this House refer feel honour-bound to fulfill. If,
the Code of Ethics to be observed by however, that is not the reason then I do
Parliamentarians, and the Code of not think that the Prime Minister in
Ethics for Ministers and Parliamentary presenting his motion has given any
Secretaries which were laid in the valid reason because he himself said that
House of Representatives on 28th Members of this House in a previous
May, 1988, to a joint select committee Parliament were honourable
of Parliament." people.[Interruption]
Seconded by Mr. Hump/ji'ey Mr. Robinson: Mr. Speaker, I rise
Mr. Speaker: What is now before seeking to correct the hon. Member who is
the House is the motion as amended. that I amtoofquote me. What I said was
Any Member recognized from here on Members of this House,that the view most of the
can deal with the motion and the motion all, I am of the view that mostsay I cannot for
have
as amended. observed, will observe...
5.30 p.m. Mr. Humphrey: I take it that the
Mr. John Humphrey (St. code is for the few who in the Prime
Augustine): Mr. Speaker, a written code Minister's view have not observed such
of ethics is required for people who are a code.
not prepared to observe an unwritten Mr. Speaker, when I took an oath, a
code. It is useless otherwise. Where very solemn oath, I swore in this place
Members of this House and of the other by Almighty God under the Constitution
place on being addressed are called and I quote:
honourable, it is expected that we would
all live up to that title and be honourable. "...having been elected a Member of
And if in fact we are all honourable men Parliament do swear by Almighty God
and women, then there is no need for that I will bear true faith and allegiance
the Prime Minister to come to the to Trinidad and Tobago, will uphold
Parliament with a code of ethics in the Constitution and the law, and will
writing. But, quite obviously, the Prime conscientiously and impartially
Minister in his judgment sees the need to discharge the responsibilities to the
come to the Parliament with a written people of Trinidad and Tobago upon
code. which I am about to enter."
In presenting the motion, the Prime Surely, Mr. Speaker, having sworn to
Minister did in fact say that Members of Almighty God and at the time being
this House had not been in breach of the sincere in what I swore, it should not be
provisions of this code or words to that necessary for me now to have to
effect. But if that is the case, why is it subscribe to lesser mortals, lesser
necessary to come to the House with a beings, in living up to a code, a standard
written code? Merely to fulfill a pledge of behaviour.
made in the manifesto? And if that is the In my 55 years of this life I was
reason then surely all the pledges made brought up and taught to observe a
in the manifesto the Government should certain standard of behaviour, and one
 557
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
of the things I was taught and I learned
very well was to tell the truth at all times
regardless of the consequences. And I
have made only one exception, and I tell
the truth in admitting to this Parliament
that I have made only one exception and
that is in my domestic life. And I will
not go into that. But in all other activities
I have told the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth for those who have
ears to listen and will listen, for those
who have eyes to see and will see.
I swore to uphold the Constitution and
the law/but what do you mean by the
Constifution and the law? Do you mean
a written document laying out rules and
regulations on how you must conduct
your life? No, Mr. Speaker, the
Constitution of our Republic, the
sovereign republic of the people of
Trinidad and Tobago, and I dare say we
will remain a sovereign republic of the
people and no sovereign will ever
emerge in the politics of this country as
long as I am in the politics. I can assure
you and the people of the country of
that. The people are sovereign.
It is not merely the written rules and
regulations, it is something very much
more than that because all the written
rules and regulations of the Constitution
within the very Constitution can be
amended with certain majorities of the
Parliament. It is something much more
important, the philosophy, the spirit
under which we come together and
make the rules that should govern the
lives of our people and ourselves. And
that spirit is in fact expressed in the
Constitution. It is referred to by some
people as a preamble. But even under
the law of this country/preamble is
substantively part of the law. So
558
Ethics
whether you want to call it preamble or
whatever you would like to call it, it is
part of the law, part of the supreme law
that governs our lives, expressed in the
very first part and written in the name of
the people of Trinidad and Tobago. And
what does it say?
"Whereas the People of Trinidad and
Tobago—
(a) have affirmed that the nation of
Trinidad and Tobago is founded
upon principles that
acknowledge the supremacy of
God..."
So we start by recognizing that God is
supreme. No Prime Minister is
supreme, no political leader is supreme,
God is supreme,/We pledge our
allegiance to Gód to adhere to the
provisions of our Constitution and our
law.
faith in fundamental human
rights and freedoms, the position of
the family in a society of free men and
free institutions, the dignity of the
human person and the equal and
inalienable rights with which all
members of the human family are
endowed by their Creator,
(b) respect the principles of social
justice and therefore believe that
the operation of the economic
system should result in the
material resources of the
community being s o
distributedas' to subserve the
common good, that there
should be adequate means of
livelihood for all, that labour
should not be exploited or
forced by economic necessity to
operate in inhumane conditions
563
Code of Friday, istJuly, 1988
[MR. HUMPHREY]
formerly known as the United Labour
Front, that worked with others to form
the National Alliance of Trinidad and
Tobago, and then worked still with
others to form the National Alliance for
Reconstruction. The majority opinion of
the people of Trinidad and Tobago, as
sampled by that poll, is that the actions
of the Prime Minister in dismissing his
Ministers was unjustified.
5.50 p.m.
I do not mind not being in the
Cabinet, I am certainly happy not to be
in the Cabinet under the incumbent
Prime Minister, because I found that
while I was in the Cabinet I was
suffering frustration that I could hardly
endure and on more than one occasion I
wanted to resign from the Cabinet
because of that. Because I was not able
to fulfil the mandate to use the power
that the people vested in me to bring to
life the spirit and philosophy of the
Constitution and to deliver on the
promises that we made on the platforms
and in writing in this document. I found
it more and more difficult to deliver
effectively because we had a Prime
Minister who did not communicate with
us, who did not use his ears to listen; he
merely used the power under the
Constitution to demonstrate that he
could hire and fire. Not, however, to
demonstrate, that he could lead a
movement into bringing changes in the
country and delivering services,
meaningful services, for the enjoyment
of the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago.
He has demonstrated that he can hire
and fire. So a Member who is concerned
about preserving the forests for all
generationJbeen dismissed. I dare say
the reason 'given was that that Member
564
Ethics
was a little intemperate in his utterings
on reaching a level of frustration where
he saw his own government doing
nothing to ensure that the forests were
not destroyed. And he agonized and
made a statement. Mr. Speaker, firing
him does not help preserve the forests.
Unless of course the Prime Minister had
some other reason which I am not aware
of.
Mr. Myers: On a point of
information, Mr. Speaker. And I say
point of information precisely because I
do not want to get into it out of
argument. But the Member has made a
statement about the Government not
doing anything about forest problems—
forest fires and cutting down of the
forests. I think it is rather unfortunate
because for the information of the hon.
Member Sir, quite a lot has been going
on in attempting to deal with that matter.
And I can assure you that the
Parliamentary Secretary was part of that
attempt to deal with the problem; was
quite instrumental in the development of
a fire plan and a whole range of other
things that go on without a whole lot of
publicity.
Mr. Humphrey: Mr. Speaker, I do
not mind the Minister responsible for
Food Production and the Environment
sharing my time in the debate. But you
see we are all left to speculate. Now, we
are debating a code of conduct for
parliamentarians and members of
Cabinet. And the conduct of the Head of
the Government, in my view, needs to
be examined. [Interruption] The conduct
of head of the Government needs to be
examined. And let us remind ourselves
that Members of Parliament, Members
of this House are required to ensure that
565
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
any Prime Minister enjoys the powers
that he enjoys because without the
majority support of the Members of this
House no member can be the Prime
Minister. Therefore the conduct of the
Prime Minister who is a member of this
House has to be examined, if we are
going to talk about code of ethics, and
about behaviour and conduct. The
country is not blind.
And I cannot agree with the Member
for Diego Martin East that what this
country needs now more than economic
recovery is a restoration of morality and
principle. Because by him saying that he
is suggesting that the people of this
country do not have a high level of
morals and principles. I do not agree
with that. No politician in his right mind
will ever subscribe to such a point of
view, and the Member for Caroni East
supported that point of view.
Mr. Smart: Mr. Speaker, on a point
of order. The Member for St. Augustine
is misquoting me. I said there was a
responsibility on the part of the leaders
of the country to focus—there was a
need for a refocussing on the nobler
qualities of mankind.
Mr. Humphrey: By saying that
what is being suggested? That those
nobler qualities are no longer part of the
national life. Because the Member did
not only say that. The Member said that
economic recovery come second to that.
And I know, as a politician interfacing
with the people of this country, that the
most important thing to the people is
recovery of the economy so that jobs
can be created so that people can get a
little income and live and survive and
make a contribution to the development
566
Ethics
of their country. In fact the very poll
revealed that.
The poll revealed that the most
pressing issue in the minds of the people
of this country is the issue of
unemployment. So perhaps the Member
made a little slip, but I think I caught the
Member out in the slips. You see a
certain approach to government and to
managing power is adopted by different
people.
Mr. Smart: Mr. Speaker, I do not
know if the Member will allow me.
Mr. Humphrey: Sure.
Mr. Smart: I will quote for him
what I said on that issue. I said:—
"The most important and most
difficult task of this government is not
to turn around the economy but to get
the nation to focus once more on the
virtues of mankind and to convince the
nation that it is worthwhile, that there
is reward in pursuing all that is noble
in the nature of man, for exemple,
honesty, respect for one's fellowman,
dedicated service and application to
whatever field of endeavour one is
pursuing."
I was very careful about my words.
"It must not be the case that the slick
and the smart man succeed, and the
lazy and those who have connections
in high places are rewarded."
That is what I said, so he must take it in
that context.
Mr. Humphrey: That is exactly
what I heard him say. If you need to
focus the society once more then you are
suggesting that the society is not
focussed at this time. And I beg to
 567
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[MR. HUMPHREY]
differ. The vast majority of the people of
this country are decent, Go4/fearing and
/- GodAloving people—the vast majority.
' In fàèt in no other society in the world
do you have the vibrant kind of religious
life that you have in this society. And
there is something that you have done
that no other society in the world has
done, and that is to apply the spirit of
ecumenism not merely within a
denomination or a particular religion but
bringing all religions into that
movement. And you have a n
organization that has been established to
represent that. It is called the Inter-
Religious Organization. All the great
religions in this society are unified in
seeking to uplift the moral standards of
the society and the religious standards
and the ethical standards and the
standards of behaviour. And they in
their wisdom recognize that you can
achieve unity in diversity, that you did
not have to destroy the Christian religion
or the Hindu religion or the Muslim
religion in order to achieve the Inter-
Religious Organization. In fact it was
recognized that it was necessary to
preserve the various religions.
Unfortunately in the politics no such
recognition has been given. You have a
political leader and a Prime Minister
who does not recognize, even though
the manifesto of the party has
recognized it and the Constitution of the
party has recognized it, he-does--net-
recognize the need to give recognition to
the mulqFfaceted nature of the politics of
this country where there are groups who
seek separate representation and who are
entitled to that representation. And that
is what has us in a mess. You have a
ruling party that has been in power for a
year and a half and it is now more
/
568
Ethics
unpopular than an Opposition that found
itself with three seats in a 36-seat
House. That is what you have in a year
and a half. And I want to know which
members of this House are going to
look at themselves and look at their
organization and look at their Prime
Minister to determine what is the reason
for this. I can tell you that it is not the
economy that is not going to pick up—
though that is true/-it is much more
fundamental than th'C It is that people
have lost confidence and are losing
confidence; everything is going to fall
apart and the economy will not pick up
unless that confidence is restored.
6.00 p.m.
So I think it is extremely important
that in discussing behaviour of Members
of Parliament we include in that
discussion the behavior of perhaps the
most important single member of that
Parliament, the one in whom under the
Constitution tremendous powers are
vested. If the Prime Minister was living
up to the spirit of the Constitution, he
would not keep the whole country in a
state of anxiety as to why he took certain
action, he would come out and say why
he took it. What the Member for Couva
South said is true. In factjl have
evidence of the truth of it right here with
meJ the whispering campaign, the,'
cafilpaign of vilification and lies that was
waged by certain very high officials of
the Government and of the party that
rules this country, whispering campaign
of lies and vilifications. Put it in writing.
Write to Mr. Panday and say, "Member
for Couva North, I threw you out
because you were trying to foist on the
people of Trinidad and Tobago an
Indian cultural centre"
V
569
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
As you were saying privately to
people in this place who have the power
to decide who should be the Prime
Minister. Come out and say it publicly,
come out and say publicly that the
Member for St. Augustine was fired
because he was trying to give a contract
to a friend and bypass the provisions of
the Central Tenders Board Act. Say it
publicly. Come out and say it publicly
as you said privately that you do not
know how the National Association for
Downs Syndrome got its resource centre
on Sydenham Avenue suggesting that
because the Member tr St. Augustine
has a Downs Syndrome granddaughter
he used his ministerial power to get it
corruptly for the Association. Come out
and put it in writing; say it publicly.
Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister
was man enough to do that and to stand
up and apologize for the wrong that he
has committed against his colleagues,
then he can perhaps turn the whole thing
around and demonstrate a sense of
humility, commitment and purpose. But
you see even that, I do not believe/will
change the attitude of the society to the
incumbent political leader and Prime
Minister.
The other point is that on the basis of
his conduct, the poll revealed that the
people will prefer that the fired Ministers
be reinstated. I can tell you that this fired
Minister will not accept any such thing.
I will not be prepared to work in a
Cabinet with the incumbent Prime
Minister as the head of that Cabinet and
as the head of the Government. I can
say that publicly and in front of the
Prime Minister. I have a code of ethics,
a standard of behaviour that I subscribe
to and Arniortunately my standard is not
570
Ethics
met by the incumbent Prime Minister,
that is unfortunate, but that is the fact. I
will not say anything behind a man's
back that I will not be prepared to say in
front of his face, that is why I stand on
the platform and say it. And that is why
I say it here while he sits opposite
chatting with the Member for Caroni
East who told us that he had a file in his
possession and in that file he had party
documents which he named, the
manifesto, the Constitution/and in that
file he also hadThe Constitution of the
Republic of Trinidad and Tobago.
We heard during the course of the
debate from the Member for Port-of-
Spain East who had raised an issue/and
Mr. Speaker, let me put o n
parliamentary record what the
Constitution of the National Alliance for
Reconstruction says with respect to the
role of the General Secretary in the
party, under article 16(iii):
"The General Secretary shall be
elected for a term of three years. The
post of General Secretary shall be a
full time paid position."
That is what the Constitution says and if
we are going to adhere to an ethical code
and a standard of moral behaviour, since
the party in its wisdom realized the
importance of the position of its General
Secretary and realized that in order to
keep the General Secretary loyal to the
party and not to the leader or to any little
clique or group/it made provision for
that General Secretary to be full time and
to be paid by the party. Any deviation
from that should not be tolerated. If the
Member for Caroni East wants to be a
Minister without portfolio, he should
resign his position as General Secretary
in the party and do not come with the
571
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
[MR. HUMPHREY]
argument that you have different
political cultures and we are seeking to
build our own culture. None of us is
going to buy that argument.
In the Soviet Union the party's
secretary is a very powerful man in the
government, but then there is no
distinction between party an d
government in that system. But this
system where we have taken an
unwritten Constitution of Great Britain
and put it to writing for ourselves that is
where you must seek your guidance in
seeking to determine standards of ethics
and morality in public affairs. And if
Margaret Thatcher, Prime Minister of
Great Britaii9would make a Minister
without portfolio pf the general secretary
of the party who is employed full time
by the partyand Ja't the party will no
longer pay ¶iim, but the Government
will pay him, then I say okay, I will be
prepared to consider that there is some
political morality. But Mr. Speaker, I as
a Member of this House representing
over 14,000 people—and it is not the
NAR that brought that support for this
Member, he had that support before the
NAR came into being—on behalf of my
constituents I consider that an act of
immorality.
Since we are on the question of ethics
I think it is very relevant to raise it. I
took the trouble this morning to take out
a dictionary and look at the dictionary
meaning of certain words. I looked for
the word 'ethics'. This is what it said:
"The study of standards of conduct
and moral judgment, moral
philosophy, the system or code of
morals of a particular philosopher,
religion, group or profession, etc."
572
Ethics
Moral philosophy, so I looked for the
word moral:
"relating to, dealing with or capable
of making the distinction between
right and wrong in conduct."
So you are dealing with what is right
and what is wrong.
"Philosophy—love of wisdom and
knowledge."
I will add to that "love of wisdom", that
wisdom is the knowledge of truth. So
philosophy is the love of knowledge of
the truth. You must seek after the truth.
Now what is truth?
"That which conforms to fact or
reality, the real or true state of things."
That is what the dictionary says about
truth.
Mr. Speaker, some of us who have
been in this game called politics for a
very long time know the real state of
things both in the Cabinet, party,
Government, Parliament and in the
country. It is only a matter of time
before a remedy is applied in this
country for the wrongs that are being
perpetrated on the people of this country
in the name of what is constitutionally
correct—that the Prime Minister has
supreme power: "When I say come, you
comethIwhen I say go, you goeth/if
you do"hot like it get the hell oue of
here"—to quote the late Prime Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
6.10 p.m.
Mr. Rawle Raphael (Arouca
North): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I
think it is incumbent upon me to rise and
573
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
support this motion which in its original
form reads as follows:
Be it Resolved:
That this House adopt the Code of
Ethics to be observed by
Parliamentarians and the Code of
Ethics for Ministers and Parliamentary
Secretaries which were laid in the
House of Representatives on 20th
May, 1988.
This motion was circulated anas the
Prime Minister indicated, several
comments were made, including
comments from the parliamentary arm of
the National Alliance for
Reconstruction. Therefore I see no need
for us to select a joint committee of the
House to further study the code of
ethics.
The code of ethics simply ensures that
parliamentarians will have a certain set
of rules and they would be guided to
avoid inconsistency relating to moral
principles,.rules of conduct and moral
questions. I am also happy to indicate
that we are fulfilling a pledge that we
made in our manifesto, page 5, which
says here:
"Introduce a Code of Ethics for
members of Cabinet, parliamentarians,
public servants, and members of local
government bodies."
As the Prime Minister indicated, the last
section of this sentence will be
introduced shortly.
If we as parliamentarians accept the
code of ethics, as I am sure we all
would, it would mean that in the future
Government Ministers will accept
responsibilities in their respective
portfolios. They would not consider
574
Ethics
themselves not accountable to anybody
for anything. As indicated here in the
bill, the object:
"to enhance public confidence in the
integrity of parliamentarians."
At this point in time it is very critical for
all of us. I do not know whether it is as
a result of the performance of the last
government, but parliamentarians are
looked upon generally as smart-men,
con-men and all different kinds of
names. I think that if we, as
parliamentarians, try our best to live up
to the code of ethics, I am quite certain
that we can be exemplars to the others in
this country. We sit in the highest court
of the land and must set the example for
others to follow.
Maybe if we had this code of ethics
enforced in our party we may not have
had this division, where at the present
time we have some Members o n
suspension. I think as parliamentarians
if we should work, as indicated here:
"Conforming to the Code shall not
absolve Parliamentarians:
(a) from the responsibility to
take such additional action as
maybe necessary to prevent
real, potential or apparent
conflicts of interest.
This is very important. We have to try
our best, despite whatever may be
written here; we have to go a bit further
and try to upkeep the standards of this
honourable House. We have to try to
understand each other better in order for
us to develop that standard that the
general public needs. They need to look
up to parliamentarians and not down or
with 'cokey eye', as the hon. Minister
indicated.
575 576
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988 Ethics
[MR. RAPHAEL]
With respect to the application it also that the hon. Member for Arouca North
states: understands my position quite clearly.
"The provisions of this Code shall Mr. Sudama: Can I get a little
not be interpreted in any way that will clarification? The Member did say...
impede parliamentarians in the
performance of their duties." Mr. Speaker: Two Members are on
the floor at this stage. I want to have this
That is very important. And at this point "giving
let me say that I do not agree with the another way" time.
provision clarified for yet
There are two situations
statement made by the Member for when interruptions
Diego Martin East, that we should not, first one is on a pointcan of
be mad( The
order and the
as parliamentarians, assist constituents second is when a Member who
in whatever problems they may have. already spoken seeks to elucidate orhas to
We preach it on the public platform that give some further explanation about
we must assist the public, whatever the something which he has said during his
problem... contribution. I do not want a situation to
Mr. Smart: May I correct the develop where three and four and five,
Member for Arouca North? I never said only because the Member who has the
anything like that. The Member for floor is willing to give way. The
Arouca North says that I said that one provision does not allow something like
should not seek the interest in one's that.
constituency. That could not be further "35. A Member shall not interrupt
from the truth. That is why I am a another Member except—
Member of the Parliament. My primary
duty is to serve the residents of the (a) by rising to a point of order,
constituency of Diego Martin East. What whereupon the Member
I was attempting to point out is that one speaking shall resume his seat
can serve the residents for Diego Martin and the Member interrupting
East better if one implements systems shall simply direct attention to
that are fair and equitable rather than if the point which he desires to
one were to serve the people on a basis bring to notice and submit it
of personal favours. That is what I was to the Speaker or Chairman
attempting to say. You set up systems in for decision."
order to serve everybody equally and
fairly. Because when one becomes a That is a point of order.
Member of Parliament or the (b) to elucidate some matter
representative of a constituency, one raised by that Member in the
becomes the representative not just for course of his speech,
the persons in one's particular party, but provided that the Member
for all the residents of the constituency. speaking is willing to give
That is the point I was making. And one way and resumes his seat and
serves people by providing amenities, that the Member wishing to
water, lights, jobs, roads and so on. interrupt is called by the
That is what I intended to say. I hope Chair."
577
Code of Friday, 1st July, 1988
So that if a Member has not contributed
to this debate, he is not entitled, under
this standing order, to interrupt the
proceedings. And there is no standing
order here that talks about a point of
clarification. There are two situations.
So in the circumstances I would ask the
Member to proceed.
Mr. Raphael: I totally agree in
setting up systems for the equal
distribution of whatever is to be
distributed—jobs, facilities,
infrastructural development o f
constituencies. I totally agree. I am glad
that the hon. Member for Diego Martin
East indicated to me that I did not quote
him correctly because as a parliamentary
representative, I feel that it is my duty,
and this is what I indicated to my
electorate, that when they elected me and
voted me into office I would represent
all their needs whatever they may be.
And anytime they come to me, whether
it is in terms of getting to the hospital or
in terms of getting a job or even
speaking
- to a Chairman, I think it is my
right as a Parliamentary representative
to, not necessarily put a hammer on the
Chairman's head, but! nevertheless,
make some form of rep'resentatioieven
if it is a recommendation of good
character or hard working person as the
case may be.
6.20 p.m.
The other indication in the code of
ethics stated:
"Conforming to the Code shall not
absolve parliamentarians from
adhering to the Standing Orders and
procedures of the House of
Representatives."
578
Ethics
This is quite true, Mr. Speaker. If we
have Standing Orders, and they are the
rules of this honourable House, we as
parliamentarians must adhere to them.
So irrespective of what we say here, we
must recognize the Standing Orders as
coming first and I think that we would
go a long way if we do follow the
Standing Orders of this honourable
House.
With respect to the guidelines, Mr.
Speaker, section 6 indicates:
"A parliamentarian shall perform the
duties of his office impartially,
uninfluenced by fear or favour."
I think as parliamentary representatives,
we are all entitled to represent our
constituents without fear or favour and I
am indeed happy that this section is
included here because at times,
Members form the opinion that a
Parliamentary representative should not
seek assistance in certain areas although
the representation may not be along a
particular line.
Some of my colleagues at times try to
interpret things as they see it and I feel'
that at all times they should look at their
colleagues in terms of people making
representations to him and as a result he
has to put forward their representation
on behalf of his or her constituents.
Section 7 indicates:
"A Parliamentarian shall be open.
and honest in official dealings with
colleagues."
This is very important, Mr. Speaker,
because if we are honest and if we are
very open in our official dealings, I
think as a unit we/as Parliamentarians
would reach mucI further in terms of
 579 580
Code of Ethics Friday, 1st July, 1988 Kiwanis (Inc'n) Bill
[MR. RAPHAEL]
moving forward and developing our Question proposed.
various constituencies. Question put and agreed to.
As I indicated earlier, Mr. Speaker, Report adopted.
wcas Parliamentarians have to go all out Question put and agreed to, That the
to ensure that the representations made bill be now read the third time.
by our constituents get to the right Bill accordingly read the third time
quarters. And as the Parliamentary and passed.
representative for Arouca North, I could
not let this motion go by without letting MENNOMTE CHURCH (INC'N) BILL
this House know that I, as a Member of Dr. Anseim St. George (San
Parliament, fully support the code of Fernando West): Mr. Speaker, I beg to
ethics as moved by the hon. the Prime move,
Minister. Thank you.
That this House adopt the report of a
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Special Select Committee of the House
The Minister without Portfolio of Representatives appointed to
(Dr. The Hon. Bhoendradatt consider and report on a private bill
Tewarie): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move for the incorporation of T h e
that debate on this motion be adjourned Mennonite Church of Trinidad and
until Friday 15th July at 1.30 p.m. Tobago.
Question proposed.
Question put and agreed to.
Aft
Question put and agreed to.
KIWANIS CLUB OF ENTERPRISE Report adopted.
(INC'N) BILL
Question put and agreed to, That the
Dr. Anseim St. George (San bill be now read the third time.
Fernando West): Mr. Speaker, I beg to Bill accordingly read the third time
move, and passed.
That this House adopt the report of Motion made and question proposed,
the Special Select Committee of the That the House do now adjourn to
House of Representatives appointed to Friday, 8th July, 1988 at 1.30 p.m.
consider and report on a private bill [Hon. B. Tewarie]
for the incorporation of the Kiwanis Question put and agreed to.
Club of Enterprise, Trinidad, and for House accordingly adjourned.
matters incidental thereto. Adjourned at 6.30 p.m.