I am confused by the APNU/AFC(read PNC) position about 34 votes constitute a majority in a 65 person parliament.
If 34 is a majority then what is a tie?
Message Board Archives
Can half a person vote: No he/she can't
2018-12-29 18:32:49
2018-12-29 19:03:42
In reply to WI_cricfan
31.
Can't have 32 as half a man can't vote, can't count according PNC/Nigel Maths.
2018-12-29 19:07:28
In reply to goofballs
31+34 = 65.
2018-12-29 19:09:21
In reply to Ayenmol
I did Modern Maths in high school top set but I am totally blown apart by this new, new modern math.
Totally confused.
2018-12-29 19:10:39
In reply to Ayenmol
31+34 = 65
Correct! Wow … you are a Math wizard
2018-12-29 19:45:33
2018-12-29 19:53:07
In reply to WI_cricfan
A better question wud be if 34 is a majority in a 65 seat parliament then were they ruling illegally?
2018-12-29 19:57:57
In reply to Maispwi
None wants to address that
2018-12-29 19:58:35
In reply to Maispwi
A better question wud be if 34 is a majority in a 64 seat parliament then were they ruling illegally?
A better question is if 34 is a majority in a 64 seat parliament, then every bill passed by the PNC since 2015 is ipso facto unlawful and invalid, no?
Someone should tell Nigel Hughes that he's not very good at pretending he's smart.
2018-12-29 20:30:02
In reply to Runs
As some commentators have already pointed out....the PNC leadership knows their majority argument has no merit....their goal is to sow the seeds of discontent in their base....they think a Trump like base ...who will blindly swallow hook line and sinker the argument....
Now expect the PNC leadership to encourage demonstrations and strife
A friend on the ground is GT...told me they may try this...but unsuccessfully....because the base in GT is also disappointed in them
2018-12-29 20:44:03
In reply to Narper
Hope it all ends peacefully
2018-12-29 20:45:35
Point is you either have a majority or you don't...tie is not a thing.
2018-12-29 21:06:01
In reply to Runs
Those PNC thieves are looking to delay the elections for as long as possible.
They are going to give themselves as much time to stuff their pockets and loot the treasury before they get the boot.
2018-12-29 21:33:21
In reply to WI_cricfan
I am confused by the APNU/AFC(read PNC) position about 34 votes constitute a majority in a 65 person parliament.
If 34 is a majority then what is a tie?
If 34 is a majority then what is a tie?
A great point made, by I think it was Christopher Ram, is that almost all of the APNU/AFC motions were passed with a 33-32 vote in their favor, so are they gonna reverse all of those or just the one which they lost?
Notably absent in voicing their dissent in this matter, is a lot of heavyweight posters on this board that would latch on any sort of injustice or marginalization to people closer to their skin color, but not a peep when THEY are the ones perpetrating...
not to put a racial twist, but if we want to present ourselves as models of character and integrity, we must be CONSISTENT
2018-12-30 08:19:22
In reply to steveo
I think I cracked this case wide open.
Charrandass Persaud is half a man! That's how allyuh treat Berbicians. 
Half goes to each side, so they are split right down the middle.
So now, we need 33 1/2 votes.
2018-12-30 09:14:26
In reply to goofballs
that explains it
2018-12-30 17:55:26
The PNC is trying a thing here with the Guyanese peeps, but Guyanese have grown up as far as basic math is concerned.
2018-12-30 18:03:12
In reply to steveo
Notably absent in voicing their dissent in this matter, is a lot of heavyweight posters on this board ..
You mean like Dukes, Larr and Chrissy. News flash: Don't expect to hear from them anytime soon..well unless Barton Scotland can't count either
2018-12-30 18:05:40
In reply to WI_cricfan
Riots have been noted to be started for much less!
Just cause some confusion, egg a certain segment of the population, make them feel they have been wronged
and then sit back and watch them kill each other
whilst the opportunistic, power hungry ones seize control.
2018-12-30 18:07:57
It was noted that Persaud by virtue of his Canadian citizenship was disqualified to be elected a Member of the National Assembly of Guyana and had no legal right to vote as an elected member of the House.
Stay far from the fan my friends.. Looks like the PNC have dug a hole for themselves with this new line of argument.
2018-12-30 18:14:14
According to Basil Williams:
“There are judicial authorities in the Commonwealth to show that where a number results in a fraction, the next highest whole number would represent the majority.
Could someone remind the PNC that the next highest whole number after 32.5 is ...drum roll please...33.
2018-12-30 18:19:58
In reply to WI_cricfan
Since PNC could never win an election fairly, they know well how to come up with their own math
2018-12-30 18:20:18
In reply to WI_cricfan
“There are judicial authorities in the Commonwealth to show that where a number results in a fraction, the next highest whole number would represent the majority.
Can somebody translate this English language to the PNC and their liars
2018-12-30 18:21:42
In reply to goofballs
Goofy the funny thing is the quote is from Basil Williams the AG of Guyana.....
Oh My Gorsh eh!
2018-12-30 18:27:54
In reply to WI_cricfan
Nice chap in person.
Maybe his bulb is not the brightest or it blew out?
2018-12-30 18:30:21
In reply to goofballs
Or maybe he is experiencing low voltage..its common in Guyana as you know
2018-12-30 18:30:51
Ramkarran former speaker:
By not resigning President David Granger and Cabinet are violating the Constitution, former Speaker of the National Assembly Ralph Ramkarran says, arguing that the no-confidence vote provisions are clear.
When the National Assembly approved Article 106(6) of the Constitution over 15 years ago, it is clear that it intended that the word “majority” should mean 33 of the 65 members of the House and did not contemplate that because there cannot be half a member, the majority should be 34, according to Ramkarran who was also the Chairman of the Constitution Reform Commission (CRC) in 1999-2000 which initiated the changes.
When the National Assembly approved Article 106(6) of the Constitution over 15 years ago, it is clear that it intended that the word “majority” should mean 33 of the 65 members of the House and did not contemplate that because there cannot be half a member, the majority should be 34, according to Ramkarran who was also the Chairman of the Constitution Reform Commission (CRC) in 1999-2000 which initiated the changes.
2018-12-30 18:33:31
In reply to WI_cricfan
Blackout!
2018-12-30 18:40:35
This is unbelievable, I am at a loss, 2018. Really Guyana? 
2018-12-30 19:09:41
In reply to Runs
Just another dictatorship brewing.
Stay in power by hook, crook or rigging.
Have no consideration or care for other people/cultures.
Flagrant violations.
2018-12-30 19:17:38
In reply to goofballs
Idiots, comedy central, potentially 15th ranked oil producer. I never see a worse bunch a $))9 in my life. No wonder folks take advantage of these stupid fools.
2018-12-30 19:46:18
In reply to Runs
My concern is that brute force and ignorance, hooliganism, violence on top of the fraud, trickery superimposed on sheer dunceness might harm a lot of people.
2018-12-30 19:55:36
No wonder they broke all the laws to give ex con a big pension befitting a King (of thugs)
2018-12-30 21:54:36
In reply to Ayenmol
31+34 = 65.
Calculus came in handy(what direction was the train going?_
2018-12-31 07:49:16
Ramjattan, Nagamootoo and Trotman still persisting with the "34 votes needed for a majority" argument. The AFC cannot survive this event, and the PNC would suffer serious harm as well, if they side publicly with the AFC in this.
Guyanese politicians learning accountability the hard way!
2018-12-31 08:07:41
Stabroek Editorial : Enough of this charade
As the year comes to a tumultuous end, it is now up to President Granger to show leadership and to demonstrate that the country and constitutional governance will be put above all else – particularly the insular interests of APNU+AFC.
On December 21, 2018, the APNU+AFC administration submitted itself to debate of a motion of no-confidence which was brought in the name of Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo in the aftermath of the results of the November 12th Local Government Elections. At the end of fierce debate and after an attempt at a voice vote, a division was sought and an uproar ensued after APNU+AFC MP Charrandas Persaud voted with the 32 PPP/C MPs, meaning that the no-confidence motion was carried by a tally of 33 to 32. Speaker of the National Assembly, Dr Barton Scotland acknowledged that the motion had been affirmed and official notification of this was later dispatched by the Clerk of the National Assembly to the Opposition Leader.
The consequences of the passage of the motion of no-confidence are addressed in Article 106 of the reformed constitution which deals with Cabinet. Many parts of the constitution are swathed in woolly terminology. This one isn’t and the pithiness of its language makes it clear to all. It states at 106 (6) “The Cabinet including the President shall resign if the Government is defeated by the vote of a majority of all the elected members of the National Assembly on a vote of confidence”.
The only interpretation that can be drawn from 106 (6) is that there must be a majority of all elected members voting in favour of the no- confidence motion for it to succeed. The minimum figure would be 33 and that was attained when Mr Persaud voted with the PPP/C.
The simple equation had already been clear to all sides particularly, the APNU+AFC. During the debate on December 21st, the APNU+AFC Chief Whip Amna Ally alluded to it. In her usual ebullient style, she declared in part: “…a hue and a cry of a no-confidence motion. But I have to tell you honourable members of the opposite side bring it on! Bring it on! The APNU AFC has a solid 33, you have an indecisive 32!” The Chief Whip had apparently been unaware of the indecision on her own side. Prime Minister Nagamootoo, the Leader of the House for Government Business had himself in several interviews prior to the vote stated that the motion would not be carried as there would be no defection from the 33.
It would be the height of crass opportunism and duplicity for this government to argue whether in parliament, the law courts or the court of public opinion that it was fully aware of the consequences of the vote but was now trying to move the goal posts.
In the early hours after the vote, both President Granger and PM Nagamootoo recognized the consequences of the vote. This position later began to change on the presentation of meretricious arguments from attorney Nigel Hughes and others. The arguments make no sense in the Guyana context and betray an intention to play fast and loose with the constitution, the supreme law of the land.
Following the appointment of a Cabinet sub-committee which had been presumed to be working on the way ahead for what should be a caretaker government until elections are held, Cabinet has been presented with what has been described as a Legal Memorandum by Attorney General Basil Williams. The memorandum makes a number of arguments relating to the no- confidence vote and concludes that Speaker Scotland be invited to “reverse the ruling issued” on December 21st. The arguments are unimpressive and it seems that some members of the coalition are flailing at every single possibility of staying in office in defiance of the constitution. It appears that if the Speaker gives short shrift to the government’s argument, the intention is for a legal challenge to be instituted in relation to the motion of no confidence. This would be a retrograde step as it would be seen as a naked attempt to subvert the constitution.
Presumably when President Granger returns from his latest round of treatment for Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma in Cuba, he and his Cabinet will have a further discussion on the legal memorandum which has been presented by Mr Williams. As unwell as he is at the moment, the President now faces the added burden of addressing the consequences of the vote of no confidence on December 21st. To defy the clarity of Article 106 (6) is to jeopardise the primacy of constitutional governance and the rule of law. The President must take a firm decision and lead his Cabinet in favour of adherence to the fundamental tenets of the constitution.
2018-12-31 08:12:48
In reply to Norm
The attorney general was on most of the local television stations last night saying yuh need 34 votes to pass the no confidence motion
They got a sitting in Parliament on Thursday to address the no confidence issue.. don't be surprise if the speaker reverse his decision
2018-12-31 09:01:39
In reply to anthonyp
don't be surprise if the speaker reverse his decision
That would be extremely disappointing, but not entirely surprising. I shudder to think of what could ensue. How would such a government ever hold up its collective head with pride again?
2018-12-31 09:03:04
In reply to goofballs
2018-12-31 09:47:15
In reply to Norm
How would such a government ever hold up its collective head with pride again?
With the math the government is doing we don't have to wait for the speaker to make a decision on Thursday to ask the question you raised.
Every kindergarten teacher must be shaking their head on this one...I mean how could they explain this math to their 5 yrs old students?
2018-12-31 09:56:59
Oh Boy Charrandass watch out
PUBLIC Security Minister and Vice-President Khemraj Ramjattan said the police are investigating and closing in on the case of bribery of former government Member of Parliament (MP) Charrandas Persaud to support a motion against his government.
“We are now learning that there is absolutely a connection with bribery, of some big sum of money… money which I understand he had wanted to transfer overseas and all of that,” Ramjattan declared on a National Communications Network (NCN) show, Context, on Sunday.
Speaking to host Enrico Woolford, Ramjattan said the evidence is being gathered to show that Persaud was not only compromised, but that there are members of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) who were fully aware of this when they brought the confidence motion against the government.
“We are having it [evidence] because he has spoken to people,” replied Ramjattan, when asked if there was evidence to support the claim that Persaud was bribed.
“It is clearly a case where he is compromised and obviously those who moved the motion, or at least one person who moved the motion, knew about this. They knew that they had Charrandas in the bag. Now that is not the kind of democratic process we want for this country. You had to know you had somebody in the bag.”
“We are now learning that there is absolutely a connection with bribery, of some big sum of money… money which I understand he had wanted to transfer overseas and all of that,” Ramjattan declared on a National Communications Network (NCN) show, Context, on Sunday.
Speaking to host Enrico Woolford, Ramjattan said the evidence is being gathered to show that Persaud was not only compromised, but that there are members of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) who were fully aware of this when they brought the confidence motion against the government.
“We are having it [evidence] because he has spoken to people,” replied Ramjattan, when asked if there was evidence to support the claim that Persaud was bribed.
“It is clearly a case where he is compromised and obviously those who moved the motion, or at least one person who moved the motion, knew about this. They knew that they had Charrandas in the bag. Now that is not the kind of democratic process we want for this country. You had to know you had somebody in the bag.”
2018-12-31 10:01:11
In reply to WI_cricfan
From what I understand Charandas sold some of his assets then migrated, Prado etc...
I suppose he would want to take that money with him, hence transfers etc
I am only speculating, same as Ramjattan
2018-12-31 10:14:06
In reply to anthonyp
don't be surprise if the speaker reverse his decision
I need to know some particulars about him.
Which party?
Race, color, hue, caste, class, does he know what cricket is?
Independently well off not depending on bribes or gov't robbery or Exxon money.
Trust me, all this matters, although the law should be plain black and white, no technicolor or various shades of misinterpretation..
Only those who have their heads in the air and holier than thou attitude cannot see all these factors at play.
2018-12-31 10:22:45
Thinking ahead.
If the crooks crookify him, plant evidence like Burnham did with a few prominent Guyanese, does that make his vote(s) invalid?
It is said that once a Judge utters, it cannot be undone.
Legislative branch is like judicial, passing out judgement (based on democratic voting process)
Basically, that it is history!
Many have double roles or residences/citizenships that's why they quickly put a qualifier to their statement about his Canadian citizenship issue.
Hopefully, they don't strip him of that in Canada. I think in US you cannot represent another country.
Dukes should proudly renounce US and reclaim Guyana citizenship as he would be a good candidate. Him gat understanding and eat roti and phulowrie, bara (doubles).
I will only take finance minister job and be autonomous from the rest jokers in the cabinet. 
2018-12-31 10:35:01
Anyhow, I digress.
In the rare event of them declare Mohandass was a crook, it should not affect the past legislatures passed.
However, if the Speaker does not play or know test cricket, he might be lured to make a judgement call to strike Persaud's vote on what was adverse to the cabinet.
Wonder if Jagdeo will win a bidding war for his vote??
So, if his vote does not count, as ridiculous as it sounds, then it is a tie.
Dunces stay in power but would have everyone under lock and key.
Notice how prominent Rumsucka and the Snakemoottoo are in this matter, bending over to please, to show their faithfulness to their new masters.
Both wanted more positions/powers/wealth from their previous party. They are no Mohandasses!
See how #46-#48 villages, Rum man's village area, surged with crime once he got new power as security minister?
Did he donate his own village people as turf for the goons to have fun and make a living by turning his back?
2019-01-03 14:35:32
Speaker of the National Assembly, Dr Barton Scotland today refused to review his decision that a motion of no-confidence was passed against the APNU+AFC government on December 21st.
His declaration came this afternoon at a scheduled sitting of the National Assembly which was boycotted by the opposition PPP/C.
His declaration came this afternoon at a scheduled sitting of the National Assembly which was boycotted by the opposition PPP/C.
Link Text
2019-01-03 14:37:55
Scotland’s stance will be a further setback for the APNU+AFC administration and will further cement concerns that it is defying the constitution and stalling for time. The government had been hoping to having him consider their argument that a majority in Parliament was 34 instead of the 33 which enabled the passage of the motion after APNU+AFC MP Charrandas Persaud voted in favour of the motion.
Search
Live Scores
- no matches