brand logo

Defeat of proposal to debate ‘displeasure motion’: Sumanthiran calls PM ‘shameless’, PM blames ‘poor strategy’

18 May 2022

  • TNA MP claims Ranil agreed to vote in favour before becoming PM
  • Ranil calls Opposition’s parliamentary strategy ‘poor’ 
BY SAFRAH FAZAL AND AAZAM AMEEN  In a sharp verbal assault, Illankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi Opposition MP and Tamil National Alliance Spokesman M.A. Sumanthiran PC accused Prime Minister (PM) Ranil Wickremesinghe of “shameless conduct” in Parliament, claiming that the latter voted against a proposal to debate a “motion of displeasure” against the President yesterday (17), despite earlier having agreed to vote in favour of it. “The only thing that has changed between today and that day is that he (Wickremesinghe) has got a job as the PM. So he has traded his principles and policies for a PM’s job. He says he didn’t take up this job to protect anybody; then why did he protect the President in this vote that was taken? He stands exposed. The Government stands exposed. The President stands exposed,” Sumanthiran bellowed in Parliament yesterday. A proposal to suspend parliamentary Standing Orders (SOs) and debate the motion on the expression of the displeasure of Parliament over the President not having properly exercised, performed, and discharged his powers under the Constitution was rejected by Parliament, with 119 MPs, including Wickremesinghe, voting against it, and 68 MPs voting for it. “When the motion of censure was being drafted, he (Wickremesinghe) wanted to look at it. I have evidence. He sent it to Galle Face protestors and got their consent. If he said he would vote for it, why did he vote against it today?” Sumanthiran further questioned, referring to a Tweet shared by the United National Party (which is led by Wickremesinghe) on 27 April affirming its support for the no-confidence motion against the President.  However, when contacted, the Prime Minister’s Media Division told The Morning that the Prime Minister has stated that the Opposition’s decision to move a vote to suspend Standing Orders was a “poor parliamentary strategy”, and that had he been in the Opposition, he would still have voted against suspending Standing Orders. The Prime Minister’s Media Division stated that the Prime Minister had been informed by Opposition MPs Sumanthiran, Rauf Hakeem, and Mano Ganesan during a discussion on 16 May that they were planning to propose the suspension of Standing Orders in order to debate the Motion of Displeasure against the President. The Prime Minister had thereafter informed the Opposition MPs that the MPs had been keen to move an adjournment debate regarding the attacks on their homes and that they should be allowed to do so, according to the statement provided to The Morning. “The Prime Minister explained that since the Motion of Displeasure was already in the Order Book, their proposal would be taken up afterwards. He said that the MPs would definitely defeat a vote to suspend Standing Orders, as the most pressing issue for them were their houses being attacked.”  This had been explained to Sumanthiran again yesterday (17) in Parliament, the statement added. It also said that the Prime Minister, following the vote, had told several Opposition MPs that the Government MPs would now use the defeat of the proposal as an opportunity to prevent the Motion of Displeasure against the President being debated at a future date too.  


More News..