Brown Burke wants House Speaker's powers to be curtailed

 

Opposition Member of Parliament Dr. Angela Brown Burke has declared that too much power has been vested in the Speaker and this should change under the revised Standing Orders. 

 

Speaking during Tuesday's sitting of the Standing Orders Committee, Dr. Brown Burke argued that MPs, who were elected by their constituents, must have a greater say in the operation of the House of Representatives. 

 

Accordingly, she wants to see the powers of the Speaker reduced.   

 

"What I believe for me is really important is that our Standing Orders yes, has a rules-based system, but far too much is left for the discretion of the Speaker and I believe that that is in fact a threat to how we operate as a Parliament. I've always said that and I maintain that. And so, I believe while we have the rules, that we need to make some of them clearer and have some clear principles on which the decisions are to be made so that the discretion is not purely arbitrary," she argued. 

 

"It is about mutual respect [and] acknowledging the importance of every member of the House. So yes, the Speaker is the Speaker. We have the Leader of Government Business, the Leader of Opposition. We have the Prime Minister who is a member. We have the Leader of the Opposition, but every single member sitting in the House comes with an authority vested in him or her from those who have voted and sent them here," she stressed.

 

Dr. Brown Burke has had several run-ins and heated exchanges with Speaker Holness since the new Parliament convened in 2025. In the latest incident, the opposition MP was accused of assaulting Mrs. Holness during last week's heated dispute in the House. 

 

In April, Dr. Brown Burke caused a major uproar in the House after she grabbed the mace during debate on the National Reconstruction and Resilience Authority (NaRRA) Act. 

 

Meanwhile, the embattled Speaker, Juliet Holness, has called for more civility in the House of Representatives. 

 

Speaking at Tuesday's sitting of the Standing Orders Committee, which is reviewing the Standing Orders, Mrs. Holness argued that the revised Orders should result in members upholding the authority of the Speaker.

 

"The work of this Committee is central to achieving that objective. Our review must therefore go beyond simply updating the rules. We must ensure that our Standing Orders are clear, coherent, and fit for purpose. That they facilitate effective debate and scrutiny, safeguard the rights of all members, uphold the authority of the Chair, and preserve the integrity of parliamentary proceedings. We have a responsibility to ensure that our Parliament reflects the standards to which we aspire. Ultimately, the Standing Orders we develop must serve the institution beyond the tenure of any one administration, presiding officer or member of Parliament. They must provide a sound and enduring framework for the conduct of parliamentary business, regardless of the political circumstances of the day," she urged.

 

Leader of Opposition Business in the House, Phillip Paulwell, warned that the country could descend into dictatorship if the opposition is denied the opportunity to speak on matters of national importance in Parliament. 

 

Mr. Paulwell called for greater flexibility in the revised Standing Orders to allow opposition members to hold the Executive Branch to account in the Parliament.

 

"For our democracy to work, and those of us who practice Westminster system, we rely on strong and effective government and equally strong and effective opposition. If those tensions aren't at the fore, then you are either going to have dictatorship or you're going to have chaos in things not being able to be done in a proper way. And it is for that reason, Madam Chairman, that I'm trying to get us, as we undertake this very important work, seminal work of a review of the Standing Orders, to make sure at the forefront of all of what we do is, yes, a preoccupation in ensuring that the parties are able to contend and contend evenly," he suggested.

 

The parliamentary opposition has accused the Speaker of using the Standing Orders to stifle and frustrate their efforts to speak on matters of national interest in the House.