PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad, CMC -An opposition legislator has defended his decision to break ranks and vote with the government on whistleblower legislation, saying, “Simply voting party lines on this piece of legislation troubled me greatly.
Dr. Rai Ragbir supported the Whistleblower Protection Bill 2024 even as the central Opposition United National Congress (UNC) legislators had signaled their intention to vote against it, initially requiring a special majority. An amendment made during the committee stage on Friday made the bill passable by a simple majority.
Dr. Rai Ragbir
Ragbir said that having read the legislation “carefully and consulting legal experts, it is my view that this legislation will benefit the people of Trinidad and Tobago as it will be a tool to fight against corruption.”
Ragbir said that while he understood that some of his colleagues “will be disappointed with my decision,” he wanted to point out that no caucus was ever held in delight to discuss this critical piece of legislation, nor were my views solicited from the Chief Whip or the Leader of the Opposition.
“This has unfortunately become the norm in the Opposition when important pieces of legislation are being considered and demonstrates, in my view, negligence on the part of the opposition,’ he added.
Opposition Leader Kamla Persad Bissessar was not present in Parliament on Friday, having sought and received approval from the Speaker to be absent.
Ragbir said, “Too often essential pieces of legislation are brought to MPs without any research, consultation with constituents/stakeholders or discussion among parliamentary colleagues.
“Simply voting party lines on this piece of legislation troubled me greatly, mainly because, as MP for Cumuto/Manzanilla, I have received numerous complaints about the Sangre Grande Regional Corporation. Unfortunately, when I told Perrons to take their complaints to the police, they were afraid of victimization, reprisals, and losing their jobs in the Corporation.
“I therefore voted to give these persons and other constituents a chance to bring their complaints forward without fear and in the interest of Trinidad and Tobago,” the medical practitioner said.
He said that as a medical practitioner with “decades of experience,” he has always believed “that the health of citizens is of paramount concern,(and) in this case, I think that the health of good governance, transparency and accountability are at stake and therefore I stand by my vote.
” No doubt, to deflect from her absence from Parliament and failure to lead a competent process in considering this bill, the opposition leader or some of her acolytes will simply shout that I no longer support the UNC. I reaffirm that I remain loyal to the members of the UNC because this piece of legislation is in their interest,” Ragbir said, adding that he is confident that “history will prove me right on this issue.”
Prime Minister Dr. Keith Rowley piloted the legislation, which grants a whistleblower immunity from criminal, civil, and disciplinary proceedings and protection from being harassed, intimidated, victimized, or suffering a loss about their “employment, family life, career, profession, trade or business.”
Acts that can be reported include crimes, miscarriages of justice, and mismanagement of public funds once the disclosure is made in good faith and not for personal gain.
But Persad Bissessar said she was not surprised at Ragbir’s position, claiming that during the recent internal elections, which her slate won handsomely, she had warned that “some of the dissidents were working with the PNM(People’s National Movement) and would go to the PNM after getting rejected by the membership in the internal elections.
“So said, so done. MP Ragbir just proved to the UNC membership that I was correct,” she told the Newsday newspaper here.
She insisted that the legislation “contains clauses that breach privacy rights” and that “It breaches a fundamental constitutional right under the rule of law for aggrieved persons to have access to a court of law.
“While the government contorted themselves to remove the 3/5 majority, that does not cure the need for more than a 3/5 majority concerning depriving persons access to a court of law,” she promised, “This bill will end up in the courthouse.”
and then 