VIDEO: Pringle says he attended Parliament because the president summoned him to do so

Opposition Leader Jamale Pringle says he was summoned to Tuesday’s joint sitting of Parliament expecting to take the oath of allegiance, but was instead asked to leave the chamber before the Throne Speech began.

Speaking on Observer Radio hours after opposition MPs and senators staged a walkout from Parliament, Pringle questioned why parliamentary officials instructed him to attend the sitting if no arrangements were made for him to be sworn in beforehand.

“This morning was an interesting morning and I want us to look at it, not to cast blame on the members of the opposition, but to look at the series of events to see why we’re here and why this transpired,” Pringle said.

Pringle explained that he missed an earlier parliamentary sitting because he travelled overseas with his daughter for medical treatment and had formally notified Parliament of his absence.

He said he later received another summons dated May 14 directing him to attend the opening of the first session of Parliament on May 26 at 9 a.m. The correspondence also stated that Parliament would assemble at 8:45 a.m. “for the dispatch of such business as may be necessary.”

Pringle said he interpreted that notice to mean he would be sworn in before the official proceedings began.

“Yes, that is what I was expecting,” he said, adding that he arrived at Parliament around 8:25 a.m. and sat in the chamber for nearly an hour before being approached by the Sergeant-at-Arms and asked to meet with Senate President Alincia Williams-Grant.

According to Pringle, the Senate President informed him that he was “not properly seated in the Parliament” because he had not taken the oath. He said he responded that the oath should then be administered publicly on the floor of Parliament so the public could understand the process.

“I take Parliament very, very serious, so I don’t normally miss Parliament,” Pringle said.

Pringle argued that the oath of allegiance is a brief procedure that could easily have been completed before the sitting formally began.

“There’s no reason why,” he said when asked whether the process could have been accommodated earlier.

The opposition leader also suggested the situation may have been deliberate.

“I believe so,” Pringle said when asked whether he believed the events were intended to disrupt the first sitting and embarrass the opposition.

He said provisions had already been made for his participation, including a seat prepared with his name, making the decision to remove him even more confusing.

“What was the reason for being summoned in the first place, if you weren’t going to be afforded the opportunity to take the oath of allegiance?” the interviewer asked during the exchange.

Pringle said no explanation had been provided by parliamentary officials.

“They haven’t given any,” he said.

Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]