THE Opposition has stood firm on its decision not to support the bill to extend
the grace period from 18 to 30 months.
Opposition leader Belden Namah said yesterday, the founding fathers had reasons to set the grace period at a bare minimum of six months, then extended to 12 and now 18 months for the same reasons put by O’Neill-Dion government that 18 months is too short to implement its policies.
He said the founding fathers knew precisely what they were doing; that a government must be dynamic and know what they were doing by swiftly moving policies and implementation from day one.
Opposition leader Belden Namah said yesterday, the founding fathers had reasons to set the grace period at a bare minimum of six months, then extended to 12 and now 18 months for the same reasons put by O’Neill-Dion government that 18 months is too short to implement its policies.
He said the founding fathers knew precisely what they were doing; that a government must be dynamic and know what they were doing by swiftly moving policies and implementation from day one.
“The message from our founding fathers is very clear. They did not want us to be
lazy and give excuses. They wanted a pro-active and performing government from
the very first day of being elected into office.
“The problem with all our governments to date is non-performance and lack of leadership. It is ineffectiveness in the public service and political leadership.
“It has nothing to do with the tenure in office. It has all to do with mismanagement of time and resources and pure laziness.”
Mr Namah said the second reason why the constitutional founders set the grace period at six months was that they were worried about a corrupt government.
“They desired that a leadership that was proving to be corrupt within 6 months of being in office must be removed by parliament at the end of 6 months.”
“The question therefore is. why is the Prime Minister, Peter O’Neill, rushing to extend the grace period so soon? Why can he not push for it towards the end of the 12 remaining months of his tenure?
“The problem with all our governments to date is non-performance and lack of leadership. It is ineffectiveness in the public service and political leadership.
“It has nothing to do with the tenure in office. It has all to do with mismanagement of time and resources and pure laziness.”
Mr Namah said the second reason why the constitutional founders set the grace period at six months was that they were worried about a corrupt government.
“They desired that a leadership that was proving to be corrupt within 6 months of being in office must be removed by parliament at the end of 6 months.”
“The question therefore is. why is the Prime Minister, Peter O’Neill, rushing to extend the grace period so soon? Why can he not push for it towards the end of the 12 remaining months of his tenure?
“Parliament and the people would be in a much better position then, to pass
judgment on whether or not Peter O’Neill and his government deserve an
additional 12 months, to take it to the total 30 months. What is his real motive
here?
“This Government’s record on transparency and good governance in particular, in just 6 months, in our opinion, is seriously wanting and is a cause for concern.
“It is necessary for parliament to maintain this power, not just for the present situation but for our future parliamentary democracy.” Mr Namah said.
“This Government’s record on transparency and good governance in particular, in just 6 months, in our opinion, is seriously wanting and is a cause for concern.
“It is necessary for parliament to maintain this power, not just for the present situation but for our future parliamentary democracy.” Mr Namah said.
No comments:
Post a Comment