Let us practice what we preach
Alliance for Changed Column
Kaieteur News
March 18, 2007

Related Links: Articles on AFC
Letters Menu Archival Menu



The AFC has no desire to engage in public squabbles with either the PNCR or the PPP; but nonetheless holds sacred its right to defend itself appropriately. This is what we sought to do when word reached the AFC that two of its Parliamentarians eligible to participate in the Nebraska work study attachment were excluded from the delegation.

We issued a press statement itemizing the events that led to what we concluded was collaboration between the PPP and the PNC to stifle the AFC's participation in the affairs of the National Assembly.

The press release had the desired effect since accommodation was made thereafter for Mr. David Patterson, one of the two AFC parliamentarians eligible to participate in the work-study programme. The other was Mr. Khemraj Ramjattan, Sector Committee member for Economic Services, who gave way to first-time parliamentarian, Mr. David Patterson.

Experiences gained on this Nebraska programme will come in handy in David's work in the Public Accounts Committee where his ‘value-for-money' expertise could rebound to the public good in scrutinising Government's spendings, and holding it accountable.

The PNCR in responding to the AFC's public outcry against its exclusion in the Nebraska work study team, invented a level of influence and control over the decisions of the National Assembly that neither the AFC, the parliamentary staff nor the Speaker knew we had.

The PNCR claimed that at the commencement of the Ninth Parliament, they had advanced the position that the number of Parliamentary Committee places available should have been taken as a whole and thereafter distributed proportionately to the various parties. They went on to state that the AFC however insisted that the allocation of members to the various Parliamentary Committees be done on a Committee by Committee basis whereby under such a formula the AFC benefited with a seat on every Sector Committee.

The truth is that the AFC insisted on nothing other than that to which it is entitled, as against the PNCR's proposal which eroded that entitlement.

It should be made known that the formula used by the National Assembly to calculate the allocation of Committee seats in this Parliament was the same formula used by the National Assembly since time immemorial and is in keeping with what is the practice in the Standing Orders of other Commonwealth jurisdictions.

The AFC therefore makes no apology for having brought this matter to public attention. Further, the AFC dismisses any attempt to silence it by invoking irrelevant privacy rules.

What this little episode has revealed is that the PNC is no different from the PPP which it usually decries and denounces. When given an opportunity to show how magnanimous it could be, it revealed how selfish it could get.

Imagine eight seats were made available to Nebraska . The governing party took four and requested the PNC to decide how the other four should be shared amongst the opposition parties. What did the PNC do? It took all four. And this is the party calling for shared governance!

On another matter which a number of our constituents wanted answers to, we hereby reprint fully the question asked and the responses given.

Parliamentary Questions asked by Mrs. Sheila Holder, AFC MP of the Minister of Health.

1. Will the Minister say what is the system being utilised by the Ministry of Health in allocating assistance for overseas treatment of citizens in circumstances where health facilities are not available and citizens cannot afford to pay for their life-saving medical treatment prescribed?

Written Answer by Minister:

The system used to provide support to persons who require treatment not available in the public hospital system applies to persons seeking medical treatment through the public hospital systems. In addition, the system does not apply only for persons seeking medical care overseas since some of the services for which the Government supported people previously to travel abroad are now available in the private sector (through a public/private partnership arrangement).

The first step is for a case to be made to demonstrate that the requested treatment or diagnostic procedure is not available in the public sector (for local private sector treatment options) or in Guyana (for overseas options).

Anyone can apply for assistance to the Ministry of Health. The person must be referred by a specialist or by a senior physician for possible overseas care.

The physician must establish that the care necessary is not available in the public sector (in the case where a request is being made for support for such services in the local private sector) or in Guyana (where overseas treatment is being requested).

The referral letter must be signed by the Head of the Hospital where the requests emanate from. The referral letter must include details about the person and the medical condition, all diagnostic tests that have been completed and the reasons why the physician feels the person would benefit from overseas treatment. The letter must include a statement that such services are not available in the public sector or in Guyana .

The second step is for the person (directly or through a responsible family member) to make application to the Ministry of Health for such assistance.

The third step is for the Ministry to complete two different assessments. These assessments are done simultaneously and not sequentially.

The first assessment is done to determine the ability of the person to pay and to ensure that all options are being pursued by the patient, e.g. NIS , private health insurance etc. The second assessment is for the Chief Medical Officer to determine the appropriateness of the medical request.

The next step is for the Ministry to determine where such services might be available and the cost associated with the intervention being requested.

The decision to support can be made at the level of the CMO and the PS if the costs are less than US$1,000. The Minister's NO Objection is required if the costs are up to US$2,000. For the sums greater than US$2,000, a no objection from Cabinet is required.

Question No. 2

Will the Minister please list the names of the persons who benefited from overseas paid treatment by the State over the last fourteen (14) years?

Written Answer:

I am unable to supply the lists of names for public examination by the Member. There is an issue of confidentiality and we would have to obtain the permission of each person to publicise this information.