Who is popular today?

Howls of protest from Opposition senators over a two-clause amendment to the old Road Traffic Act yesterday failed to gain traction as the Government used its majority in the Upper House to suspend the Senate Standing Orders and pass the Bill, which had also been pushed through the Lower House at an emergency sitting hours before.The senators were insistent that they be given time to review the amendments, and that the Bill was being rushed to save face in the wake of the November 3 injunction granted by the Supreme Court restraining the Government from imposing certain fixed penalties under the Road Traffic Act. The decision was handed down after a claim was made against the attorney general and the commissioner of police by citizen Maurice Housen over traffic fines.The Road Traffic Amendment Validation and Indemnity Act (2021) seeks to amend the Road Traffic Act (1938) to include penalties that were established in 2006 and 2007 by provisional tax orders signed by then Finance Minister Dr Omar Davies. The Bill increases the range of fixed penalties for offences under the Act and could protect the Government from having to pay out monies to motorists who had ben overcharged in traffic fines since 2006.Opposition senators Peter Bunting and Lambert Brown staunchly objected to a suspension of the Standing Orders to take the Bill, which they said did not require the kind of urgency being given by the Government.Bunting said the Government's sincerity was unconvincing, given that three years had elapsed without the regulations to the 2018 Road Traffic Act being passed to bring that piece of legislation into effect."The Government has done nothing in terms of bringing that urgent priority here, so now, to be bringing an amendment to the old Road Traffic Act in a chaotic way, and asking us to further add to this chaos by suspending Standing Orders to allow no time for us to make the most informed contribution that we can to this debate is inconsistent with good governance [and] is not a desirable way to conduct public business," he asserted.He insisted that the Bill did not warrant the disruption of the Parliament in the manner in which it had been done yesterday.The Opposition argued that the only reason the Bill was being pushed through was the injunction handed down by the Supreme Court restraining the Government from imposing certain fixed penalties under the Act.The injunction resulted from a class action suit brought by Housen in July against the attorney general and commissioner of police. Housen took the Government to court after he was issued with a ticket for driving above the speed limit under the old Road Traffic Act. He contended that the charge should have been $800, based on the 1938 Act, and not $5,000. The amendment will see fines ranging from $5,000 to $10,000 for that particular offence.Housen's argument was that, despite the existence of fixed penalties for offences under the old Road Traffic Act, those penalties had not been increased by Parliament, notwithstanding the provisional orders of 2006 and 2007, under the provisional Collection of Taxes Act, which increased the fines.Meanwhile, Senator Brown said he was concerned about the implications of the amendments for citizens, including whether it would deny any refund to individuals who had been overcharged in traffic fines."What the Government is doing is a Nicodemus, chakka-chakka approach to the Road Traffic Act," he stated, calling for the regulations to the 2018 Act to be expedited instead.He pointed out that the fines being introduced in the indemnification and validation Bill were less than those contained in the 2018 Bill, and that, instead of appealing the court's decision, the Government had opted to bring a Bill to Parliament that possibly undermines the 2018 Bill.Leader of Government business in the Senate Kamina Johnson Smith agreed that the delay with the regulations had been frustrating, but stressed that the process was extremely technical, requiring layers of consultation with various agencies and departments of Government."This is what is causing the delay; it is extremely complex," she said, noting that bringing the regulations now had therefore not been an option.