House Speaker Juliet Holness has blasted Tuesday’s Opposition walkout from Parliament, describing it as “regrettable” and “an affront to the proper order of the House.”
The confrontation erupted during the afternoon sitting when Opposition members clashed with Holness over their right to ask questions following a statement from Water and Environment Minister Matthew Samuda on the Government’s preparations for Tropical Storm Melissa.
Holness ruled that the questions being raised were unrelated to the statement and violated the Standing Orders — a decision that sparked protests from the Opposition benches. Opposition Leader Mark Golding and his team accused the Speaker of being unfair and engaging in improper conduct before exiting the chamber.
In a statement issued Tuesday night, Holness said the incident was “especially disappointing,” emphasizing that her rulings were guided strictly by parliamentary procedure.
“The business before the House must always be conducted strictly in accordance with the Standing Orders,” she said. “The actions of Speakers are guided solely by the Standing Orders, and Speakers are compelled to act to preserve order, uphold the rules, and maintain the integrity of our proceedings.”
Holness explained that the disruption began when the Opposition Member for South East St. Mary Christopher Brown posed a question that was “procedurally improper” and “outside of the allowed questions” based on Minister Samuda’s statement.
“The question clearly related to payment to contractors and settlement of invoices and was outside of the Minister’s official cognizance,” she said. “Having assessed the content of the question against the relevant rules, it was determined out of order.”
She cited several provisions of the Standing Orders, including Standing Order 16(1)(a), which limits questions to matters within a minister’s official responsibilities, and 16(1)(g) and (h), which prohibit questions seeking opinions, hypothetical answers, or commentaries on private individuals.
Holness added that both the Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of Opposition Business “rose at separate intervals” to challenge her ruling, even after she offered to suspend the sitting to find “a reasonable way forward.”
“Instead of finding an amicable solution, efforts were made to continue the matter publicly in defiance of the ruling,” she said. “It was a clear attempt to usurp or publicly undermine the authority of the Speaker.”
According to Holness, Opposition members were later instructed “to refrain from asking questions and from furthering the people’s business in protest of the ruling.”
“The subsequent walkout by Members of the Opposition was regrettable, to say the least,” she charged. “But worse — it was an affront to the proper order of the House, a breach of parliamentary decorum, and, ultimately, it undermined the interest of the people of Jamaica whom we are all elected to serve.”
Holness concluded by reaffirming her commitment to fairness and discipline in the chamber.
“Members, I remain committed to following the Standing Orders impartially, firmly, and without fear or favour,” she said. “This is the House of Representatives — it is a chamber for serious, respectful, and disciplined debate in the interest of the people of Jamaica.”
