Some weeks ago, the Prime Minister pushed the historic and controversial land-for-debt swap Bill through Parliament. Yet it was only on the morning of the debate that most Parliamentarians were able to see the list of lands to be swapped for debt.
The Bill was given three readings in the same sitting, and passed. Talk about unholy haste!
During the debate, Deputy Prime Minister Sam Condor and Senior Minister Timothy Harris expressed deep concern, as did every Parliamentarian on the Opposition side.
But in the end, nobody voted against the Bill, and it became law, which was unfortunate, because there was at least one other way that an arrangement could’ve been worked out to have the debt to the National Bank paid down without the people having to lose their land. And that way was discussed in the media: take the SIDF money and pay down the debt with it.
And to be sure, the Prime Minister and his surrogates of the Prime Minister made it known that no MP or Cabinet Member had voted against the Bill.
Fast forward.
Last week the PM’s propaganda unit announced that a Bill to increase the number of Senators (and other Bills) would be brought to Parliament on Wednesday, 21st November. Then there was a follow up a few days ago, outlining the objects and reasons for this Bill.
Interestingly, the intention seemed to be that this Bill would be passed in one sitting. Another example of unholy haste.
The reasons given for the Bill related to the need to appoint a Deputy Speaker, the need to get more hands on deck to help address the complexities of running a modern Government, and the need to add balance, including gender balance, to the Parliamentary process.
Did somebody have an epiphany here? Or was it just another ‘crock of bull’?
Our Constitution states at Section 26(2) that the number of Senators shall be three or such greater number (not exceeding two-thirds of the number of Representatives) as may be prescribed by Parliament.
And the present number of Senators is three. It has always been that number.
Now while Parliament can constitutionally increase that number without even requiring a mandate from the people, or even a special majority in the Parliament itself, the fact is that changing the composition and numbers in Parliament is a very serious step. And given the political, financial and other implications, a responsible Government would see itself as being obligated to engage the people on such a matter.
This, of course, didn’t happen. Instead, we saw this unholy rush to pass the Bill.
For me, the real objective behind it was this: sensing that Mr. Condor and Dr. Harris, while by no means reckless and irresponsible about it, have been demonstrating a willingness to voice their concerns and disapproval with regard to certain weighty matters, the Prime Minister, looking, inter alia, to have constituency boundaries changed, set about to give himself the numbers in Parliament to have his way. At the same time, he’d also come closer to achieving something that he wanted to do for some time now: choke Messrs. Condor and Harris into political submission.
He wants to replace them, and the intention is to force their hand.
But before he could do all of that stuff, he‘d first have to get this Bill passed.
However, it had become clear, even before Parliament sat yesterday, that things wouldn’t go the way they’d gone with the Bill dealing with the land-for-debt swap.
Not this time!
This would be a far rougher ride. One that would end in defeat for the Prime Minister.
He had held at least two meetings between Tuesday night and yesterday morning to see if he could get the numbers required to pass the Bill. In fact, it was yesterday morning’s meeting that caused the start of proceedings to be delayed by 90 minutes. But nothing went his way.
Not this time.
So it was understandable when, at the time when the Bill was to have its Second Reading and be debated, the Attorney General moved for an adjournment to 7th December, 2012.
Dr. Douglas needed more time.
The Bill was put on the Order Paper, and given its First Reading.
I’ve heard people try to make the case that Mr. Condor and Dr. Harris, along with the Opposition members, should’ve moved to amend the Order Paper by having the Bill struck from it, and also to oppose the Bill at First Reading, although they knew full well that either challenge would fall short of a majority by one vote.
This means that the Bill would’ve reached its Second Reading anyway, at which time, and only then, it could be successfully challenged, because the motion by the Government to pass the Bill would now be one vote short of a majority if Mr. Condor and Dr. Harris were to vote against it.
There’d be a tie.
Remember, if you initiate the motion, you need to get a majority if you’re to succeed. So if you only get a tie, the motion fails. On the other hand, if you oppose it, all you need is a tie in order to defeat it.
Note also that the present Speaker, not having been elected from among persons who are Members of Parliament, has no vote, whether original or casting.
The people making the said argument claim that, having squandered those two opportunities, Mr. Condor and Dr. Harris may’ve compromised their credibility by waiting until a Second Reading to mount a challenge.
And they further claim that, as before in the land-for-debt-swap case, the two of them, by not having challenged at the Order Paper and First Reading stages, can be said to have given their support to this Bill.
I disagree.
If it is that they truly wished, and wish, to oppose this Bill, the decision as to how and when to do so would have to be a strategic one, leading ultimately to the all-important vote at the end of the Second Reading, with the Bill now fully debated. And letting the earlier stages go by unchallenged can’t be fatal to their cause.
But this is only my opinion.
Whatever your opinion may be on the matter, yesterday, Dr. Douglas got the message, loud and clear: Not This Time!
However, I wouldn’t be surprised if between now and 7th December, he tries to induce and seduce people into supporting the Bill. Meanwhile, his surrogates might intensify their vilification of Mr. Condor and Dr. Harris, in an effort to intimidate and demoralize them and their supporters…and others.
But if that succeeded in the past, I can’t see it happening anymore. Not this time!
Mr. Condor and Mr. Harris must be convinced, as are so many thousands of Kittitians and Nevisians, that Dr. Douglas wants them out of his hair and out of politics, and that his intention with this Bill is to do just that. And I can’t see them sitting back rather than fighting back, all in the cause of ‘the Party’.
Not this time!
They’ve done more than enough of that. Anyway, what ‘Party’? There’s no Labour Party. All that’s left of it is a carcass, its body and soul violated and desecrated by marauders and imposters under Dr. Douglas.
Indeed, it is for the Party in the long run, and, most importantly, for the people, now and forever, that this Bill needs to be used to turn the predator into the prey, and to stop the bully from his bullying.
Denzil Douglas must not and cannot be allowed to get away with this ‘smartness’.
Not this time!
