sto­ries by Gail Alexan­der

Se­nior Po­lit­i­cal Re­porter

The Sen­ate ad­journed for its mid-year re­cess yes­ter­day, sus­pend­ing de­bate on a con­tro­ver­sial bill con­cern­ing the re­struc­tur­ing of cer­tain di­vi­sions in the Le­gal Af­fairs Min­istry.

It is un­der­stood that the de­bate was halt­ed for the Gov­ern­ment to have fur­ther con­sul­ta­tions on the bill.

When the ad­journ­ment was an­nounced, UNC Sen­a­tor Wade Mark said, “I’m so hap­py I can now ex­hale ... The knee on the neck of Wade Mark has been re­moved—I can breathe. We de­fend­ed the lawyers and So­lic­i­tor Gen­er­al to­day!”

The bill was a Mis­cel­la­neous Pro­vi­sions bill to amend the Ju­di­cial and Le­gal Ser­vice Act, Chap. 6:01; the Chil­dren Act, Chap. 46:01; the Patents Act, Chap. 82:76 and the Le­gal Pro­fes­sion Act, Chap. 90:03 with re­spect to the ad­min­is­tra­tion of the Min­istry of Le­gal Af­fairs and for re­lat­ed mat­ters.

The bill pro­posed re­struc­tur­ing of Le­gal Af­fairs Min­istry di­vi­sions, in­clud­ing merg­ing the de­part­ments of the So­lic­i­tor Gen­er­al and Chief State So­lic­i­tor.

The Gov­ern­ment’s ex­pla­na­tions have in­clud­ed not­ing the Stan­ley John re­port on the miss­ing file in the min­istry in 2023 and in-house is­sues which had been not­ed in the in­ves­ti­ga­tion of that. The bill has al­so been de­scribed as re­form which would not take place overnight.

It was passed in the House of Rep­re­sen­ta­tives on Wednes­day via sim­ple ma­jor­i­ty—but mi­nus Op­po­si­tion sup­port. UNC MPs ob­ject­ed to it on var­i­ous grounds.

De­bate be­gan in the Sen­ate on Thurs­day, and con­tin­ued yes­ter­day. UNC’s Mark who spoke, said the bill was far-reach­ing. He felt the At­tor­ney Gen­er­al—in whose min­istry the var­i­ous de­part­ments are based—should not be giv­ing the se­nior of­fi­cers in­struc­tions. He ac­cused the Gov­ern­ment of try­ing to “hi­jack” the civ­il law di­vi­sions.

“With­draw this bill!” Mark de­mand­ed.

He said the So­lic­i­tor Gen­er­al and Chief State So­lic­i­tor could not both head the di­vi­sion ei­ther.

Mark de­clared the bill was un­con­sti­tu­tion­al, un­law­ful and ul­tra vires and that it usurped the pow­ers of the Salaries Re­view Com­mis­sion.

He called for a po­lice probe of the 2023 con­sul­tan­cy of Mas­ter Christie-Ann Mor­ris-Al­leyne with the min­istry, which he said was a breach of the sep­a­ra­tion of pow­ers. He called for a pro­cure­ment reg­u­la­tor probe of the con­sul­tan­cy con­tract.

Mark queried why she was “hired to run the show.”

Af­ter Mark con­clud­ed, Sen­ate leader Amery Browne an­nounced that the Sen­ate would ad­journ to a date to be fixed. He ex­tend­ed best wish­es to the Sen­a­tors.

Gov­ern­ment sources lat­er told Guardian Me­dia that de­bate on the bill had been halt­ed to al­low for some fur­ther con­sul­ta­tions with Sen­a­tors, with the op­tion of re­sump­tion of de­bate on Sep­tem­ber 9.

Pi­lot­ing a sub­se­quent mo­tion on the for­mer Petrotrin re­fin­ery, UNC’s Mark warned the Gov­ern­ment there had been a “... Land­slide for labour in the UK ... it’s on­ly a mat­ter of time be­fore we have a land­slide in T&T and sweep the PNM out!”

Sen­ate pres­i­dent Nigel De Fre­itas, end­ing the sit­ting, not­ed the Sen­ate had had four days of busi­ness, “... Which would have re­quired noth­ing less than men­tal and phys­i­cal prowess.”

“How­ev­er testy at times, your per­se­ver­ance has shown com­mit­ment to the peo­ple’s busi­ness as re­quired of all of us when we sit in these chairs ... I wish each and every one of you, a very hap­py, re­lax­ing and calm re­cess,” he added.

Both hous­es of Par­lia­ment of­fi­cial­ly be­gin re­cess from to­mor­row.