The Government has used the motion to suspend former prime minister Patrick Manning as a diversionary tactic and has shifted the argument away from the validity of what Manning had said with respect to the Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar's residence.So said Member of Parliament for Diego Martin North East, Colm Imbert, last night as he spoke in an interview after a motion was passed in the House of Representatives to suspend member for San Fernando East Patrick Manning.
Imbert said: "In our view the Government has thrown away whatever opportunity they could have had to look at the merits of what Mr Manning said or to determine the truthfulness of his allegations."He said the Government had changed the subject and operated like a kangaroo court, without procedural fairness."In their haste to suspend Mr Manning they have broken every rule of procedural fairness," Imbert added.
He felt the committee had made several blunders and should have warned Manning if he did not attend an adverse finding would be made against him.He added that the final report by the Privileges Committee had been submitted without agreement from all committee members.He described the report as inconsistent and incomplete and had said during the sitting in Parliament that several things in the report were inaccurate.He said the Government also had brought an incomplete motion to the House and amended it in midstream, effectively ambushing the Opposition.e felt Government was trying to create a new talking point in the country to distract from its own internal issues.