The Hon. Bimal Rathnayake

¶ 01 Hon. Speaker, since the suspension of Standing Orders is being moved as a Government motion, I need to clarify it for the Chief Opposition Whip. If there were a Committee on Public Finance constituted, we would have no issue about presenting it to that Committee. But there is no such committee yet; when a new Parliament commences, that is a general task of Parliament, not “our” issue. Therefore, the argument that “now the Government is suspending Standing Orders” is wrong; that is being framed with a certain political implication.

¶ 02 Second, on the five-day laying issue: regarding the Resolution, we discussed it properly and agreed. If you had opposed it then, we would have had to act differently. We expected the agreed ethical practice to be followed; we will conduct ourselves accordingly.

¶ 03 As for technical defects—no date on the letter Hon. Dayasiri mentioned, and its late submission—setting those aside, the Hon. Speaker permitted it. Especially for a money matter, under the circumstances, it is acceptable. However, since a Bill was mentioned, I request Hon. (Dr.) Nalinda Jayatissa, Minister, to clarify that point for the House, so we can proceed calmly and responsibly.