Readers’ reactions

Opposition walks out of Parliament after clash with House Speaker

If the OL [opposition leader] is correct that the statement included aspects on behalf of the other minister in charge of the NWA, then the questions should have been taken I think. – @madald2

Rules are rules. The standing orders are the ‘rules’ of Parliament. The Speaker’s job is to administer the proceedings, in observance of the rules. It really is that simple. Robert’s Rules of Order are similar in nature. We must have guidelines for smooth and harmonious proceedings. – @Zemi66

Dem can stay out. Elections dun. Grand standing to seek attention. – @SandyyMay

I don’t agree with walkouts. They are childish. – @deaneddie75

Juliet Holness has no business being the House Speaker. Yes, she’s an MP, but she’s also the PM’s wife. This is a stain on our democracy. – @JamrockMila

War when a storm/hurricane approaching. When will we get it together. – @JAMA_CAN

If this is what we are in store for in the third term, fourth term nah guh load. – @doughburt

The behaviour of the Speaker of the House feels wrong. The standing orders, yes, but shutting down the MPs before they can complete their questions is pushing it. The Speaker’s posture is not in the best interest of the people. Feels like muzzling the Opposition. – @ji_er684

I would have been frustrated as well. Total disregard. – @lancebrown19

It can’t be though that the people’s business is not looked after because of ego though. There is an impending storm, and time is a factor. The opposition cannot simply get up and walk out over this. Some consensus should have been arrived at. The speaker of the house was indeed heavy handed. If she is getting in the way of the people’s business then she should make way for someone who is not a stumbling block. – Mario James

Odd. I would think that it would at least be in order to let the question be asked in its entirety. Minister Samuda could easily indicate that he is not in a position to answer a question that relates directly to another portfolio. If an answer is insisted on in such a scenario then that would be a more appropriate time for the Speaker to intervene if required. No real need for the Speaker to intervene in the middle of a question on the basis that she is personally of the belief that the question is irrelevant and contravenes standing orders. That sets a bad precedent. – Robert Armstrong

Readers’ reactions sourced from The Gleaner’s X, formerly Twitter, and Facebook pages. Compiled by Khanique McDaniel