Wescot-Williams moves to regulate escalating motions before a motion of no confidence

GREAT BAY--Chairlady of Parliament MP Sarah Wescot-Williams announced a legislative initiative that would formally regulate an escalating set of parliamentary motions, ensuring that Parliament has clear steps to hold ministers accountable before resorting to a motion of no confidence.

At the center of the initiative is a bill under Article 33 of the Constitution that creates defined stages of censure. The proposal introduces motions of disapproval and motions of correction, with the latter instructing a minister to rectify a decision and report back within a set timeframe, followed by other structured options that can be voted on, before Parliament would consider the ultimate step of a no-confidence motion. As the MP explained, the aim is to codify “different steps that would happen before the ultimate,” so that Parliament can signal concerns, require corrections, and escalate only as needed.

“Article 33 only regulates one kind of motion, and that is a motion of no confidence,” MP Wescot-Williams noted. “I believe there should be different levels of motions, so that Parliament has more options before reaching the ultimate step. For example, a motion could direct a minister to correct a decision and report back to Parliament, rather than immediately moving to remove that minister from office.”

The new draft legislation, which has not been officially submitted to Parliament, emphasizes proper use of ministerial interpolation, which already exists in the rules of order but is seldom applied. Interpolation would be used in a more structured way, allowing Parliament to question ministers and secure specific answers within prescribed timelines.

Complementing the Article 33 bill, the MP is preparing draft amendments to Article 59 on the dissolution of Parliament and snap elections. She intends to add conditions and safeguards that reflect the original constitutional intent, limiting the repeated use of snap elections as a default political tool. The draft text is prepared, the MP will consult colleagues on options before formal submission.

In addition, the MP confirmed she has completed a draft Referendum Law that aligns with constitutional parameters for referenda. The bill provides a clear legal framework for when and how a referendum can be held, consistent with the Constitution’s limits and requirements.

“We need to modernize our parliamentary instruments and provide clarity where the Constitution is vague or silent,” MP Wescot-Williams said. “These reforms create a rational sequence: question and clarify, correct and report, escalate when necessary, and reserve no confidence for when all other remedies fail.”

‍