We believe that the Parliament is the place where the people's perspective on burning issues finds expression through their chosen representatives and where all the members are given equal opportunity to ventilate their points of view, which in fact are the points of view of the people. Unfortunately, there is no reflection of that spontaneous discussion that one expects to see on the floor of the House on issues of immediate and urgent nature that impacts the life of the people.

As a citizen, and certainly as a voter, we have legitimate expectations about what the Parliament should do in terms of authentic discussions on issues that relate to genuine public concern. Issues raised under points of order are generally done in a superficial and perfunctory manner, with the attending air of casualness in the whole affair. But most issues demand and need thorough deliberations.

To the Speaker we ask, you are the guardian of the Parliament and by implication the guardian of the people's rights. Is rejecting all notices given by the opposition, especially those dealing with such burning issues as electoral reform, corruption, price rise, shortage of power, etc a good way of playing the "guardian's role"? Not only on Sunday, we have painfully observed that notices submitted by the opposition have been regularly rejected in the past, raising serious public concern as to the usefulness of the exercise if public concerns are not reflected in parliamentary debates.

We need hardly remind the Speaker that it is he who should encourage discussion on vital issues, instead of disallowing those. If people's views were not allowed to be expressed in the house of the people then where would they be?