THE Government is facing demands to explain why it failed to disclose to Parliament that it was considering a major shift in Jamaica’s foreign policy before asking Members of Parliament to debate the country’s position on Cuba, with the Opposition accusing it of misleading the House.

But Leader of Government Business Floyd Green rejected the allegations, arguing that Opposition members participated in and supported a clearly worded motion on October 27, and could not subsequently claim they had been misled.

The dispute intensified on Tuesday when Opposition Member of Parliament (MP) for St Andrew Western Anthony Hylton called for Parliament to censure the Government, apologise to the House, and explain who authorised Jamaica’s decision to abstain from a United Nations (UN) resolution calling for an end to the United States embargo against Cuba.

Hylton argued that Jamaica’s longstanding support for the resolution, maintained by successive administrations for more than 30 years, made the Government’s failure to disclose its contemplated change particularly troubling.

He pointed to Foreign Affairs Minister Kamina Johnson Smith’s acknowledgement on October 28 that the Government had been reflecting on the matter for some time.

“The Government knew on Tuesday, when it stood in this House, what it would do on Wednesday. It chose not to tell this House. The minister now says the resolution did not instruct the executive how to vote. That is true, and it is beside the point,” Hylton said during a debate on the censure motion on Tuesday during a sitting of Parliament.

He also questioned whether Jamaica had approached Cuba or proposed amendments to the resolution before abstaining.

The motion also demands that the Government explain within seven days when the decision was made, who authorised it, and when instructions were sent to Jamaica’s United Nations representative. It also calls for an apology and formal censure.

Hylton said the decision had left him and other Jamaicans feeling betrayed.

“I feel aggrieved, and I feel betrayed and so do members on this side, and so do thousands of Jamaicans at home and in the diaspora, who believed that when this house speaks with one voice, the Government it holds to account will not quietly walk away from it the next morning,” he said.

However, Green, while contributing to the debate, said the motion was based on a flawed interpretation of the October 27 proceedings. He noted that Opposition members, including Hylton and Paulwell, participated in the debate, but nobody moved an amendment or formally objected.

GREEN… argued that Opposition members participated in and supported a clearly worded motion on October 27, and could not subsequently claim they had been misled. (Photo: Garfield Robinson)

He argued that the Government’s motion concerned Cuba’s economic and humanitarian situation, not a binding instruction on how Jamaica should vote at the United Nations.

“Disagreement after the fact does not amount to deception at the time. And a political disagreement with the Government subsequently does not retrospectively convert a properly debated parliamentary motion into an act of parliamentary misconduct,” Green said.

He maintained that the conduct of foreign relations was the responsibility of the executive, while Parliament’s role was to scrutinise Government decisions and hold ministers accountable.

Green ended his contribution by invoking Standing Order 38 and asking for the debate to be closed and put to a vote.

The debate followed a press conference at Gordon House earlier on Tuesday, where Opposition Leader Mark Golding and other Opposition representatives criticised the abstention.

Golding questioned how Jamaica could claim to oppose the embargo while refusing to support a resolution calling for it to end.

“Because if you do support Cuba, you would support the motion in the UN to end the embargo. How can you say you’re not in favour of the embargo, but you’re not prepared to vote to end the embargo? It is a non sequitur, a contradiction in terms, and frankly, a very deceptive act. And I don’t think it has fooled anyone,” he said.

Jamaica’s abstention on October 28 was the first time since the resolution was introduced in 1992 that the country had not supported it. The resolution received 130 votes in favour, 17 against, and 25 abstentions.

The Government has maintained that abstaining does not mean it supports the embargo, with Johnson Smith saying the resolution’s wording did not reflect Jamaica’s broader approach to Cuba.

The parliamentary debate ended amid objections and heated exchanges after Green called for it to be closed. Opposition members stood in protest, and the sitting was adjourned. Following the adjournment, a confrontation occurred between Opposition MP Mikael Phillips and Government MP Desmond McKenzie.