Guy Joseph maintains he did not breach any standing orders

Guy Joseph maintains he did not breach any standing orders
Castries South East MP Guy Joseph.
Castries South East MP Guy Joseph.

Senate President Claudius Francis has said that the standing orders give the Speaker of the House many options, which allows him to prevent a member to continuing his speech, but opposition Member of Parliament Guy Joseph maintains that he was not in breach of any standing orders.

While Francis did not offer to comment on the exchange between House Speaker Peter Foster and the Castries South East Member MP on Tuesday, he said that the speaker could have used at least three standing orders, given the nature of the debate and the issue he was confronted with.

He told HTS News Force that Standing Order 41 states: “The Speaker in the House and the Chairman in any committee shall be responsible for the observance of the rules of the House and Committee respectively and their decision upon any point of order shall not be open to appeal or shall not be reviewed by the house except upon a substantive motion made after notice.”

Francis explained that there are motions that could be made on the floor that does not require notice and others that requires notice, noting that the substantive motion requires notice and has to be put in writing for the approval of the presiding officer in the sitting at a subsequent meeting.

He said Standing Order 43 states: “The speaker after having called the attention of the house or the committee to the conduct of a member who persists in irrelevance or tedious repetition either of his own arguments or of the arguments used by other members in debate may direct the members to discontinue his speech and resume his seat.”

Further, in Section 43:2 it goes on to say: “The speaker shall order any members whose conduct is grossly disorderly to withdraw immediately from the house during the remainder of that days sittings. If the member refuses to withdraw the speaker may direct steps to be taken as necessary to enforce such order which includes the intervention of the sergeant of arms.”

However, Guy Joseph maintains that it was inappropriate for the speaker to engage him in a debate and stressed that his questions were relevant given that the government had earlier passed a motion seeking parliamentary guarantee for the project he was highlighting.

“I could not see how it was irrelevant, because I was highlighting what was in the contract and the speaker chose to explain to me what was in contract. I was simply saying that what is in the contract which says that 450 days from the commencement date of the project would be the completion date, and it says 450 days from the commencement date would be the end of the defects liability period.”

Joseph said the speaker never said that he was in breach of any standing orders. “The speaker never highlighted to me that I was in breach of the standing orders. What the speaker said to me is while I do not want to lecture you on law, but I need to tell you that your interpretation is wrong.”

The UWP MP said there is nowhere in the standing orders which gives the speaker the right to interrupt law for any member. “If I am saying something that is out of place, I would understand that the person with the motion, who is the Minister of Finance, may say to me, through the speaker, that my information is not in keeping with what the contract says. I don’t know the speaker has access to the contract.”

Further, the Castries South East MP said the speaker even demanded that he offer an explanation “quickly” in reference to his comment on the signatories of the contract being the permanent secretary and the contractor, who have the same surname.

“I mean since when the speaker will dictate at what pace I should be speaking in the house. I had just started my presentation and before I even started it looked like that speaker wanted me to end,” he concluded.

(0)(0)

No posts to display

41 COMMENTS

  1. The speaker was wrong and bias!! He provoked Guy into anger!! Speaker needs to hold his ass and know his role....chups. Ready to drink Guys blood when he heard his woman name... Chups

    (0)(0)

  2. I believe that the speaker was doing his best to deter Guy from making his contribution. There was no breaking of any rule or standing orders. Guy was rude? Remember when Kenny called the then Government renegades in the house then walked out. Lucians stop the hypocrisy! What good for the goose is good for the gander. Mem bette mem pwell.

    (0)(0)

  3. As much as this was entertaining It was very disrespectful..guy is the "life of the party" and without him the parliament debates would be very boring ..i guess that's why everyone likes the stunt he pulled in the house..but seriously this looks really bad ..i think guy needs to apologize to the speaker..btw what did Claudius do wrong ? He just stated the roles of the speaker..so why are u guys calling him an ass ??? Guy needs to take a chill pill and to stop being a damn puppet..

    (0)(0)

  4. Guy was right and was impressive in how he handled himself.It’s time to begin letting them know (SLP) Mr. Joseph is one of the few members who stand for the people of St Lucia. He provides data, patterns and threats. I believe he was unfairly treated. .” He deserves every right to stand and speak for every Lucian uninterrupted
    They keep on referring to the yellow book where “period of commencement” had two different meanings. I really want to see where contracts were ever written in that exact format. I have seen time and time again during this present admin Kenny and co have done far worse to their MPs by heckling them during debates. PIP needed several seats down

    (0)(0)

  5. It's time to begin the "I stand by Guy csampaign." Mr Joseph is one of the few members who opposes the government. He provides data, patterns and threats. I believe he was unfairly treated. It's simple all who agree simply type "I stand with this Guy." He deserves every right to stand and speak for every Lucian uninterrupted

    (0)(0)

  6. Where ignorance is bliss, it really is folly to be wise
    (though only in the minds of the unwise)

    (0)(0)

  7. Clod de Ass is an anal retentive, self important fool, just like Peter. Those two suckers love power, but they just don't carry the same power as the great Guy Joseph.

    (0)(0)

  8. I need something to be clarified because this type of conduct is unacceptable. Whilst i believe both parties are wrong I am strongly disappointed in the speaker of the house who allowed his emotions to get ahead of him and initiated this whole scenario. At no point in time should the speaker of the house engage in debate with a parliamentary representative what he is allowed to do however is assist in the order of the debate. If Mr Guy Joseph was in breach the Speaker should have clearly stated.Therefore it is of my opinion that they should both apologize.

    (0)(0)

  9. This is a wake up call !!
    Information is key. Hopefully it will guide us to making the most important choice, come elections.

    (0)(0)

  10. Guy was right and was impressive in how he handled himself. Peter is just a self important big belly cry baby. Look at how he talks like he is some kind of God. I remember firing mate as my lawyer, totally useless.

    (0)(0)

  11. Speaker of the House, you make no sense. You need to get out of there. Maybe you want to be the next Kenny Anthony or even your father.

    You are bias and you must not get involved. Perhaps you need to learn the rules before instructing Guy. You are wrong and NOT GUY.

    (0)(0)

    • That the speaker never enters into debate in the house and is impartial he put his legal gown on when he gavehis legal opinion on contract law not his job so he broke tne rules also he was defending the goverment signatories to the document not his job the speaker must remain impartial and clearly showed he wasnt perhaps he forgot he was in parliament when his lawyerly advice took over

      (0)(0)

  12. Claudius still exist. This dude needs to exile some place where no one knows him. Please.

    Anyway - Guy did not disrespect the dam house nor did he disrespect the speakarrrr, Foster.

    Foster would not allow him to make his point and he he could not because Foster kept interrupting him. He said then he would get move on to the next point since Foster is schilling someone.

    (0)(0)

  13. WOW LUCIANS, I TELL YOU SO MANY IGNORANT PEOPLE LIVE IN THAT SMALL ISLAND!!... WHY ARETHEY HATING ON WHAT CLAUDIUS SAID ?

    The man Claudius said, he will NOT COMMENT on the Guy Joseph and Peter Foster debacle SPECIFICALLY.

    But according to STANDING ORDER 41(which is the standing order that the house is governed by)

    the speaker of the house shall be responsible for the rules and order in the house of representatives and Parliament.

    THAT'S WHAT THE MAN WAS EXPLAINING. SIMPLE SHIT !!

    But some people have to come and make ignorant statement about what the man said !! SMMFH !! LUCIANS

    Go on hts news and hear the full interview of what the man was saying. and stop being shallow !!

    http://htsstlucia.org/francis-addresses-speakers-role/

    (0)(0)

  14. lucians i dont get your thinking!! when criminals break the law we want them killed or punished in the most severe manner!! so now whats with the hypocrisy? if this man is out of order and he breaks the rules and laws then let him be accountable for his action!! he was completely out of order!! like a drunkard he was one step away from an actual fist fight!! we cannot encourage this type of behaviour in our place of respect!! we must send a positive message for our children!! use your inside voice and handle their issues or concerns in a none aggressive way!! yes we can be passionate for the love of our people and country but you must be a man and have self control!! be a good role model show respect and to never lose your cool thats when you know that your voice is being heard and that you risen above the rest!!

    (0)(0)

    • Firstly I blame the people of Castries South East for imposing that moron on us and secondly they will vote for guy again and in years to come this will be the behavior in our honorable house.

      (0)(0)

  15. I agree with Guy! If there was any disorder in that house, it was instigated by that so-called speaker. He caused it because Guy was hitting a nerve. I guess we all know now what that nerve is. foster, get off that chair before you do more damage to yourself and whoever you think you are trying to defend. What a mess!

    (0)(0)

    • Read the comment of 'get to the point' and use the common sense one assumes that you possess.

      (0)(0)