KINGSTON, Jamaica—Leader of Government Business in the House of Representatives Floyd Green is rejecting claims by Leader of Opposition Business Phillip Paulwell that the Opposition was deceived in the handling of the Motion on the Economic and Humanitarian Situation in Cuba, which was debated and passed in the House of Representatives on Tuesday.

In a response to Member of Parliament for Kingston East and Port Royal Phillip Paulwell, Green in a statement, rejected the characterisation of the process as “improper and unparliamentary”, pointing out that the motion was read aloud in the House, debated by members on both sides and passed without objection or amendment.

“The Opposition heard the motion and had every opportunity to respond. No member of the Opposition objected to the motion, moved an amendment or asked for the debate to be adjourned or deferred so that its wording could be examined,” Green said.

He noted that senior Opposition members, including Paulwell, Anthony Hylton and Dr Angela Brown-Burke, participated in the debate and articulated the Opposition’s position on the issue.

Green said while Dr Brown-Burke commented during her contribution on the departure from past practice, he said no formal objection was raised, and the Opposition ultimately supported the motion.

The Government House Leader also rejected Paulwell’s assertion that he had been given any assurance regarding the wording of the motion.

Green said he had advised Paulwell from Friday, October 23, that the matter would be raised at Cabinet and subsequently informed him that a motion relating to Cuba would be brought to the House. He said that upon Paulwell’s further enquiry on Tuesday, he indicated that the motion was still being finalised and would be tabled during the sitting.

“At no time was the wording of the motion discussed, or any assurance given as to what the final wording would be,” Green said.

He maintained that once the motion came before the House, its content was clear and members had the opportunity, under parliamentary procedure, to object, seek an amendment or request that consideration be deferred.

“Differences of policy are not deception. The Opposition may disagree with the position of the Government, but to tell the country that the Opposition was misled over a motion read in its hearing, debated with its participation and passed without objection or amendment is inaccurate,” Green said.

He added that the allegation also reflects unfairly on the proceedings of the House and the members who participated in the debate.

Green said he was particularly disappointed that Paulwell, an experienced legislator and Leader of Opposition Business, would participate in the debate and the passage of the motion and subsequently seek to characterise the parliamentary process as deceptive and unparliamentary.

He has called on Paulwell to withdraw the comments which he said bring the Parliament into disrepute.

Green also noted Paulwell’s stated intention to raise the matter formally at the next sitting of the House and reminded him that any such intervention must be undertaken in accordance with the Standing Orders.

Despite the disagreement, Green said he remains committed to working with the Leader of Opposition Business to ensure the efficient functioning of the House.