body,td,th { font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; }
So you've heard two sides of the 11th amendment debate, both on timing and intent. But for a third perspective we asked constitutionalist and attorney Richard Dickie Bradley for his take on it. He says that the tabling of the amendment, coinciding as it does with the timing of Shyne Barrow's "no confidence" motion, is suspicious. We had a little audio issue with the recording of this interview, so you might want to turn your television up a bit:
Dickie Bradley, Attorney
"The timing is suspicious this is a matter that has come up already and now a day before the House of Representatives is to meet in which the Hon Shyne Barrow is going to hopefully as he said on the news last night that he is not sure what is happening with his motion but he has in fact filed a motion with the speaker of the house or the clerk that there should be a vote of no confidence against the lead for the ruling party who is also the prime minister. Now that is a matter for numbers and the ruling party has about i think 26 seats in the House of Representatives and the opposition has 4, so there is no way that the motion would succeed."
"It is very suspicious for that to just emerge sudden like this I think they are trying to throw some heat on the leader of the opposition. The courts in the country will strike it down because it looks too much like a personal attack against the leader of the opposition you can't be using the laws of the land to dither your political or your personal agenda."
Our news team will be at the House meeting tomorrow to see how it all goes down, and you can also see that meeting on Channel 7 or our facebook page.
