A compromise between Government and Opposition leaders on the volatile fiscal accounts issue aborted an anticipated clash between rival finance spokesmen, but failed to reduce tensions in the House surrounding the issue.

An obviously disappointed minister of finance and the public service Audley Shaw, literally ambled through his revised statement, which stuck to the basic ingredients of some $18 billion in additional expenses which the new Government has inherited and how he would bridge the gap.

An equally disappointed Opposition spokesman on finance, Dr Omar Davies, called an opportunistic press briefing inside the Opposition’s meeting room, after the House adjourned, to remind the media of the points he had made to defend his record as minister.

During his response to the minister’s statement, Davies suggested that while Shaw’s effort was commendable, it was not so for some of his Cabinet colleagues, including minister of industry, commerce and investment Karl Samuda.

Things appeared to be getting out-of-hand when Leader of the House Derrick Smith rose and chided Davies for abusing the newly introduced privilege, granting opposition spokesmen the right to respond to statements from ministers.

Smith insisted that Davies focus on the issues raised by Shaw. He said that in amending the Standing Orders, to allow the Opposition to respond, the Government did not intend to accommodate “lengthy” speeches.

Deputy Speaker Marisa Dalrymple-Philibert, who was having her first taste of the chair, found no one willing to respond to her busy gavel.

Dr Peter Phillips, the leader of opposition business, said that there was no specific allegation as to the abuse of privilege, and suggested that Davies be allowed to conclude his presentation.

Prime Minister Bruce Golding then intervened, taking responsibility for the revision of Shaw’s statement to the Parliament, which he said was intended to avoid exactly what was happening in the House.

“The first draft that was delivered for the minister’s statement was not what he delivered. He and I had discussions and we both agreed that we were going to make the issue as non-contentious as possible,” Golding explained.

“Therefore, in his statement, he sought to attribute no blame, he ascribed no motive. If the tenor that was set by him is to be changed, then it is making a terrible statement to us as to how this facility is going to be abused in the future,” Golding said.

Dr Phillips said he appreciated the observation, but that Davies had also revised his first draft in order to similarly reduce tensions. He insisted that there was no abuse of privilege.

Speaker Delroy Chuck, who then took back control of his chair, asked Davies to control his statements and gave him two more minutes to complete.