Ques­tions for Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty Min­is­ter Fitzger­ald Hinds on the num­ber of peo­ple ar­rest­ed and charged for mur­der from Sep­tem­ber 2022 to 2023 are on the Sen­ate’s agen­da to­day—along with an Op­po­si­tion bid to an­nul a le­gal or­der to ex­empt fi­nanc­ing ser­vices by the Gov­ern­ment from pro­cure­ment scruti­ny.

The Sen­ate re­sumes reg­u­lar work to­day af­ter the re­cent­ly con­clud­ed de­bate on the 2024 Bud­get.

On to­day’s agen­da, In­de­pen­dent Sen­a­tor Dr Paul Richards has ques­tions for Hinds on the per­cent­age of sus­pects/peo­ple ar­rest­ed and charged for mur­der for the pe­ri­od Sep­tem­ber 2022-2023, com­pared to the mur­ders re­port­ed in the said pe­ri­od.

Richards al­so wants Hinds to iden­ti­fy the av­er­age num­ber of func­tion­al po­lice ve­hi­cles, per po­lice di­vi­sion, for the pe­ri­od Sep­tem­ber 2022 to Sep­tem­ber 2023.

As well, Richards is seek­ing to know how many ap­pli­ca­tions have been re­ceived for pep­per spray li­cences since the com­mence­ment of the Firearms (Amend­ment) Act and how many li­cences have been grant­ed, dis­ag­gre­gat­ed by gen­der, since the com­mence­ment of the act.

Richards is al­so seek­ing the av­er­age time elapsed be­tween ap­pli­ca­tion and ap­proval/de­nial of ap­pli­ca­tion for li­cences and how many agents for the dis­tri­b­u­tion and re­tail of pep­per spray de­vices are reg­is­tered and ap­proved.

Mean­while, Op­po­si­tion Sen­a­tor Wade Mark will present a mo­tion seek­ing an an­nul­ment of the Gov­ern­ment’s pro­cure­ment ex­emp­tion or­der which was pub­lished on Sep­tem­ber 8.

It’s one of two mo­tions the Op­po­si­tion has mount­ed seek­ing an­nul­ment of the Pub­lic Pro­cure­ment and Dis­pos­al of Pub­lic Prop­er­ty (Ex­emp­tion) (Fi­nanc­ing Ser­vices) Or­der, 2023, be­fore the up­com­ing dead­line by which such ef­fort can be made. Af­ter the Sep­tem­ber 8 pub­li­ca­tion, of­fi­cials said there was a 40-day pe­ri­od in which ef­forts could be made to seek to have it an­nulled. That dead­line was ex­tend­ed due to the Bud­get de­bate oc­cu­py­ing Par­lia­ment’s at­ten­tion in Oc­to­ber. The dead­line is now said to be Sat­ur­day.

On to­day’s Sen­ate agen­da, Mark’s mo­tion not­ed Sec­tion 7(6)(e) of the Pub­lic Pro­cure­ment and Dis­pos­al of Prop­er­ty Act, 2015 via which the Fi­nance Min­is­ter may with the agree­ment of the Of­fice of Pro­cure­ment Reg­u­la­tion—sub­ject to the neg­a­tive res­o­lu­tion of Par­lia­ment—by or­der, de­ter­mine that the Pro­cure­ment Act shall not ap­ply to ser­vices pro­vid­ed to pub­lic bod­ies or State en­ter­pris­es.

How­ev­er, the mo­tion notes that the Pub­lic Pro­cure­ment and Dis­pos­al of Pub­lic Prop­er­ty Ex­emp­tion Or­der, 2023 pro­vid­ed that the Pro­cure­ment Act does not ap­ply to the pro­cure­ment of fi­nanc­ing ser­vices by the min­istry for cen­tral gov­ern­ment; or a pub­lic body, where the fi­nanc­ing ser­vices are to be guar­an­teed by the Gov­ern­ment.

The mo­tion stat­ed that the pro­cure­ment ex­emp­tion or­der is “con­trary to the prin­ci­ples of good gov­er­nance, name­ly ac­count­abil­i­ty, trans­paren­cy, in­tegri­ty and val­ue for mon­ey” and called for it to be an­nulled.

A sim­i­lar mo­tion was filed by Barataria/San Juan MP Sad­dam Ho­sein in the House of Rep­re­sen­ta­tives. It hasn’t been de­bat­ed yet. The HOR last Fri­day ad­journed to a date to be fixed and it’s un­cer­tain if it will meet be­fore Sat­ur­day.

De­spite un­cer­tain­ty about Ho­sein’s mo­tion, there is spec­u­la­tion whether Mark’s mo­tion might re­ceive sup­port from In­de­pen­dent sen­a­tors, some of whom had pre­vi­ous­ly ex­pressed con­cern about the re­moval of fi­nan­cial ser­vices from pro­cure­ment law. That was sub­se­quent­ly ad­just­ed by the Gov­ern­ment.

The Op­po­si­tion has been crit­i­cal of pro­cure­ment ex­emp­tion or­ders since mid-year, when one was pre­sent­ed re­gard­ing ser­vices for vis­its of for­eign dig­ni­taries. Dur­ing the Bud­get de­bate, Ho­sein ac­cused the Gov­ern­ment of plan­ning an ex­emp­tion or­der re­gard­ing loan ser­vices for the Wa­ter and Sew­er­age Au­thor­i­ty.