Premier Alex Scott has lambasted the Opposition United Bermuda Party for their ?disgraceful? decision to walk out of the House of Assembly on Friday in protest ? suggesting they have made a mockery of Parliament.

The extraordinarily bitter and chaotic scenes began soon after Opposition Whip John Barritt rose to table a motion of censure against Housing Minister Ashfield DeVent for ?the failure to consult? as promised with the residents of Mary Victoria and Alexandra Road in Pembroke over plans to build 20 houses in the area.

Mr. Barritt?s motion was based on a letter signed by 188 area residents and sent to Mr. DeVent last Thursday, demanding to know why he had broken the promise made in the House and in a letter in March of last year, that he would withdraw the planning application ?pending further consultation? with them.

No sooner had Mr. Barritt sat down, however, when Government Whip Ottiwell Simmons and the Premier were on their feet, strongly objecting to the motion.

Mr Scott argued it was ?inaccurate? and ?misleading? because he had been assured there was consultation ? in spite of the residents? letter to the contrary which he did not refer to.

With the chamber in uproar, Speaker Stanley Lowe ordered a vote be taken to decide whether the motion should be set down on the order paper for debate at a later date ? a course of action deemed unacceptable by the Opposition, who feared Government was attempting to quash discussion of a thorny issue by using their majority to ?kill? the motion.

With their vociferous protests left unanswered and on the prompting of Opposition Leader Grant Gibbons, the UBP stalked out of the chamber in disgust soon after, accusing Government of mounting a direct attack on the right to freedom of speech.

The war of words showed no sign of abating yesterday as Mr. Scott went onto the offensive, accusing the Opposition of bringing Parliament into disrepute and undermining the authority of the Speaker.

?The way they acted was absolutely disgraceful and totally inappropriate for Her Majesty?s Opposition,? he said.

?They demonstrated a terrible lack of respect for the Speaker and in so doing, broke one of the most crucial facets of traditional parliamentary conduct. I cannot imagine what the uproar would be if I or any member of the Government had behaved in a similar fashion and the Opposition has got to be held to exactly the same standards of behaviour. You just cannot have politicians conducting affairs like that otherwise all you would get is complete anarchy. It was a very dark day for the House and our parliamentary system.?

In response, Opposition leader Grant Gibbons admitted his party?s actions had cast the parliamentary system in a very poor light.

But he insisted nonetheless that the UBP had been forced into drastic action by the agenda of Government, who were attempting to prevent the Opposition from doing its job by cynically blocking an attempt to censure a Minister who 188 Pembroke residents say has broken a promise.

?What we were trying to do was to follow through on an obligation we have as the Opposition to hold Government accountable ? and amid all the chaos I think that might have been forgotten,? he said.

?All Government was attempting to do was shut down debate on an issue they do not want discussed. Such action is highly irregular and violates the principles of Parliament. It was indeed a sad day for the House ? and it was unfortunate because there was a lot of shouting and name calling which doesn?t do anything to improve the public perception of the House. But shame on Government. If we are going to apportion blame for this unruly episode, it has to be said that Government precipitated the chaos through their highly inappropriate actions.?

The decision to ?down tools and leave? allowed for ?order and tranquillity? to return to the House, he added, which was in the best interests of Parliament and all concerned.

But in a further twist yesterday afternoon, the Premier contacted to allege that Mr. Barritt had wrongly changed the wording of the motion approved by the Speaker the previous day by directly naming Mr. DeVent.

A somewhat baffled Mr. Barritt meanwhile, while admitting that the actual wording of the motion referred to the ?Minister responsible for housing?, accused Mr. Scott of ?splitting hairs?.

He did concede, however, that he was somewhat ?overzealous? in his behaviour on Friday, although he echoed the sentiments of Dr. Gibbons in stating Government had been duplicitous.

?For the Premier to now say Government was objecting to me using Ashfield DeVent?s name in the motion is totally fallacious,? he scoffed.

?Yes, I used his name rather than referring to the Minister responsible for housing ? but come on, who else were we talking about? I did get steamed up and what started it was when the Premier accused me of misleading the House and the people. That suggestion was totally laughable because I had done my homework and was well aware that the housing Minister was in possession of a letter signed by over 180 residents accusing him of failing to enter into constructive dialogue with them as promised.

?But the Speaker was being muscled by the Government, who wanted to kill the motion from the very outset, while they were attempting to muzzle the Opposition from speaking out. Their behaviour was totally unacceptable.?