P.E.I. capital budget debate resumes after confusion over process

Debate around the P.E.I. government's $78-million plan for capital spending in 2016-17 resumed Friday morning after MLAs on all sides were left in confusion when the budget passed the previous evening following just four minutes of debate

The government and two opposition parties reachedan agreement Friday to allow for a more fulsome debate on the Appropriations Act, the bill which authorizes government to spend the money laid out in its capital budget.

• P.E.I.'s $78M capital budget passes with little debate

• P.E.I. capital budget unveiled at $78M

But the actual legislative debate over the capital budget (the "consideration of the estimates," as it's known by its parliamentary title) couldn't be restarted because that debate concluded when the budget was passed the night before after just two questions were posed, both by Green Party Leader Peter Bevan-Baker.

On Thursday, Opposition House Leader James Aylward suggested there may have been a "procedural error" which allowed government to pass its capital budget after just four minutes of debate.

But on Friday, Aylward said no error had occurred.

"Obviously last night there was a lot going on in the House," he said.

'It was done in much haste'

Aylward was one of three members of the Official Opposition outside the chamber when the capital budget was passed.

"I wasn't in the House precisely at the moment that the budget was passed so I needed to ascertain first and foremost whether or not the procedure had been followed correctly," he said.

"I went back and reviewed the records and it was, although it was done in much haste. The government side were saying, 'Carry the budget, carry the budget' and it was passed before our members could say, 'No, we have questions.'"

Premier Wade MacLauchlan added his name to the list of MLAs who were surprised to see debate on the capital budget conclude after four minutes.

"Well of course we were there ready to answer questions," he said.

"The finance minister was on the floor with staff. There were no questions and the discussion closed. There may have been some reflection later as to why questions weren't asked but I can't account for that."

MacLauchlan said government's move to bring the Appropriations Act forward for debate on Friday displays its commitment to "openness and transparency and to a collaborative approach in the House, and it's with that spirit that in effect the questions are being asked in consideration of the Appropriations Act."

Debate on the Appropriations Act continued for 90 minutes on Friday before the day's sitting concluded, and will have to resume before a vote is taken.