BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – WEDNESDAY, the 17th day of July 2013, can be ‘Judgment Day’ for the citizens and residents of St. Kitts and Nevis. Judgment Day, because from all indications it is logical to conclude that the Electoral Boundaries Bill will be tabled in Parliament. Also, Judgment Day, because the Prime Minister can request the Governor-General to prorogue Parliament, if he so desires, after the passing of that Bill.
And what will the Opposition do in Parliament come Wednesday? Will they stage another walk-out as they did at the previous Sitting? I am certain they will, because both the People’s Action Movement and the People’s Labour Party had made it clear that they would oppose any attempt to change the boundaries at this time, and that no other matter should go before the Parliament other than the Motion of No Confidence.
They did that at the last Sitting and, what happened? Prime Minister Douglas and other Members on the Government Benches passed six Bills. To me, it seems as though Dr. Douglas, one of the best political strategists in the Caribbean, had tested the waters on Monday the 8th of July to see what the Opposition’s reaction would be and they were suckered into it. He was successful in his quest and will also be successful in the passing of the Electoral Boundaries Bill.
Should this happen, what will the Opposition do? Will the Members take the matter to court? If so, on what grounds? I am no expert on the Constitution, but (Review of constituency boundaries) Section 50 (7) states: “The question of the validity of any proclamation by the Governor-General purporting to be made under subsection (6) and reciting that a draft thereof has been approved by resolution of the National Assembly shall not be enquired into in any court of law except upon the ground that the proclamation does not give effect to rule 1 in schedule 2.”
In my limited capacity, I understand it to mean that the matter could only be taken to court if the changes made were not in keeping with the equitable distribution of the population.
However, as earlier mentioned, I am not an expert on the Constitution and it would be greatly appreciated if one of those qualified individuals in the Federation could explain what it means in layman’s terms for us, the ordinary folks, to comprehend.
But, why is there so much controversy over the boundary changes?
Is my beloved Prime Minister scared of calling elections without changing the electoral boundaries?
It is the perception of many people, including Dr. Douglas, that PAM had changed the boundaries in 1983 to remain in office. But, certainly there has been a very significant change since 1995 which was reflected in the constituents’ choice of which political party should take them into future.
With the current boundaries, the St. Kitts-Nevis Labour Party had won seven seats in the 1995 elections, all eight in 2000, seven in 2004 and six in 2010. So, what is the problem with the boundaries in 2013? Is it because Sam Condor and Timothy Harris are no longer with the Party and confidence has been replaced by the spirit of fear?
No, I don’t think so! There should be no fear because Dr. Douglas and his Ministers have been telling us that the Labour Party has “Full Confidence” and we should have full confidence in the ruling party.
So much for boundaries; let me briefly share my views on some of the other issues and situations that permeate the land of my birth.
I was appalled by the firing of Timothy Harris and equally so by Sam Condor’s resignation. But, they both have their reasons for the stance they took in Parliament regarding the Senators Bill and their support of the No Confidence Motion. Today, we see that they have crossed the floor.
Each man to his own order I would say. But why the mud-slinging and character assassination? Why call them hogs? And more importantly, why call on them to resign as elected Members of Parliament when you are filled with confidence in your success at the upcoming elections?
Yes, it may be said that they were in Parliament on a Labour ticket; but on Nomination Day, all those who are contesting an election pay their EC$150.00 as candidates contesting in a particular constituency and not for a party.
Additionally, there are many constituents who do not vote for parties but for the candidate they believe would better represent them in and out of Parliament. I am one such person!
This particular issue is repeatedly mentioned on the Labour Party’s political platform. Doctors Douglas and Asim Martin as well as Marcella Liburd always call upon the two former government insiders to resign. The latest call was made last Friday, and Marcella used the Antigua/Barbuda and Trinidad/Tobago issues of Colin Derrick and Anthony Stuart as well as Jack Warner respectively, as a yardstick for their retirement, stating that they came under a Labour ticket and bi-elections should be held to replace them in Parliament.
However, why does she not use the No Confidence Motion of those two countries as a yardstick for the one not being tabled in St. Kitts and Nevis?
This matter goes on as ad nauseam and all of their outpourings are banal repetitions of the same offering.
On too many occasions we have seen principles being sacrificed at the altar of political expediency.
I was also appalled by the ludicrous behaviour of some members of the opposition parties, especially Lindsay Grant and Douglas Wattley.
Those desirous of leading must first learn to follow; they must set examples and this was not done by Grant during his party's march and Rally on that Wednesday. Permission was granted at the 11th hour but there were restrictions, and although there are confuting episodes of what transpired, he should have stuck to the prescribed route and not attempt to intimidate the police.
Wattley's situation is worse! One should not preach about peace and unity and practise hatred and violence. He was totally out of order when he told the large gathering in Bank Street after Grant was arrested that the government must be removed by any means necessary. Statements of such nature can create havoc amongst the people and cause the Federation's tourism-based economy to further suffer.
Yes, he did apologise, but the message was already out.
Another issue is the alleged shooting at the house of the Speaker of the National Assembly, Curtis Martin.
As far as I am concerned and from what I read and heard in the media, something is amiss. To date, the police have not said anything about it, and that should strike everyone as being out of character; for the police are known to issue press releases for almost any and everything, even though they may be limited in details.
The Speaker of the House in any country is a VIP! Isn’t the Honourable Curtis Martin classified as such? But, then again, if the shots were fired at his house, why weren’t there tell-tale signs on the building?
Even if it were suggested by the main law enforcement body to downplay the incident because of the volatile situation that current exists, why was it spoken of at last Friday’s Labour rally by Dr. Douglas?
For this particular issue, there are more questions than answers, and two questions are: (1) Who was the target of those shots? (2) If it were the Speaker of the House, were those shots fired as a warning for the stance he took at the last Sitting?
Now for the law enforcement agency, as Commissioner Walwyn likes it to be called.
Leaked emails, purportedly written by the Commissioner, labelled those who participated in that Wednesday’s march and rally “insurgents”. The first email also spoke to number of other things, including not granting permit to the organisers and the readiness of the police and their “less lethal”.
It also spoke to the Commissioner allegedly colluding with politicians to subvert the June 26th march and rally; while the second one claimed that he called some of his Senior Officers “backstabbers”.
If what the leaked emails contain were factual, then it would be invidious of the Commissioner of Police to interfere in political issues where decisions have to be made by politicians. A position in which he stated he would never find himself because he is apolitical.
Now back to the boundaries issue.
We are just days away from the next Sitting of Parliament and, as I mentioned before, from all indications it is logical to conclude that the Electoral Boundaries Bill will be tabled and Members on the Opposition Benches will again stage a walk-out.
But the big question is: After its passing, will the Prime Minister request the Governor-General to prorogue Parliament?
It is said that true patriots ultimately do not mind who rules their country, once the rule is in the interest of the nation.
