BASSETERRE, St. Kitts - What should have and could have been an intelligent, incisive and informative discourse on an important, life changing issue of national importance to Kittitians and Nevisians was allowed to degenerate into a sorry exhibition of sordid behaviour; very little of which having any relevance to the Bill.
The noise which erupted in the People’s Parliament, The Citizen’s House, The National Assembly of Kittitians and Nevisians was so loud and boisterous that it drowned out the debate and, above the noise, listeners were not able hear the discussion on the VAT Bill; a real pity, a lost opportunity, a disservice to the people and to the country.
All that remains lingering and still blistering the intelligence of a discerning public is the belligerence of Members…and who did what to whom, who distanced themselves from statements which they made in public, which Member appeared to be overtly chastising and reprimanding the Chair, whose photograph was surreptitiously obtained, which member was fast asleep and the full exploitation of Parliamentary privilege, at times, appearing to be stretched to the .nth degree all the way one step away from the High Court?
There were a few, and sadly only a few, good contributions on both sides of the aisle. Notable among them, on his side, was the Member for Constituency Seven, whose presentation, although a little ‘over the head’ at times, was, for the most part, as surgical as it was educational. It was easy to digest, explanatory, with perfectly timed injections of humour and it was brought to life with effective examples of the likely impact on real people in villages around the island.
His presentation was pitched to the level of every person and to the whole person all at the same time. Without having to say he was speaking for the poor, the poor felt an affinity to the Member, who, during his contribution, presented the Bill as being pregnant with enormous possibilities but cautioning that if rushed hurriedly to delivery, the result could be spontaneous abortion or a ‘still birth’.
Not only did the Member tower, but like Shakespeare’s “Colossus”…he did bestride that side of the aisle on which he sat in the hallowed hall of the Parliament like a Colossus allowing the other petty men to walk under his huge legs, peeping about only to find themselves shrouded in public dishonour and humiliation. In comparison to this Member, the others could be characterised as mere underlings.
Were the halls of Parliament on that day hallowed or was the People’s Parliament allowed to become HOLLOW and SHALLOW? Parliamentarians were loud and aggressive - vexatious to the spirit. No one will attempt to refute the argument that the Parliament represents a bastion of our democracy but Parliament was battered, buffeted and badly bruised and democracy was demeaned, dethroned and almost decapitated by Honourable men.
Parliament is the institution in which laws are made to regulate behaviour in society and for the maintenance of a well ordered society, but one must seriously and without bias examine the question, “Will any law be taken seriously and observed by the public when enacted by a Parliament in which there is no order, only disorder and where there is contempt and gross disrespect for each other and disdain towards the authority of the Speaker?” Example shown, example followed!
The public will certainly pay no heed and turn its back on observance. Effective enforcement will always be problematic. One has only to look around to see whether this is a reality currently being played out the society with ‘petty crimes’. It may be easy to rebut this argument by asserting that there are consequences to violation. But the objective of good laws is not to catch and punish people who are offending but, more importantly, to encourage persons to do that which is right.
Clearly, the Chair appeared to be controlled for most of the time and on very few occasions appeared to be in control. The constant refrain of “hol’ on, hol’ on, hol’ on” did not help. Listening on the outside one wondered how close the Chair came to being ‘named’ by some Members who ‘took him on’.
With all of his unceasing efforts and urgings to prompt members into raising the level of debate and discourse, there was still a glaring lack of discipline and decorum in Parliament. The Members appear to have little interest in helping the Speaker, when he leaves, to walk away with my integrity. It does not matter how he cajoles and cautions and pleads and begs, the Speaker continues to fail even in convening Parliament ON TIME, ANYTIME, EVERYTIME. In this regard Members continue to ‘dis’ the Chair. This behaviour is base. Community elders would comment, “Ma’cy dat lower than duck instep.” It is more than a mockery of any serious commitment to law and order which as stated, is a first priority. Is this a priority really on the national agenda and occupying a place of pre-eminence?
Discipline is an essential underpinning of law and order. If there ‘ain’t’ no discipline in Parliament, the law-making body, there will be no discipline in the schools, in the homes, the workplace or the wider society. The other agents of social control will be turned upside down and not function. Instead of community, there will be chaos, providing fertile ground for juvenile delinquency and criminal activity to grow and flourish.
If the Parliament continues to be stripped of its sanctity and is desecrated and disrespected in this manner at high noon and in full public view, all reasonable persons, patriots, should be concerned over the fate of other revered national symbols at the hands of Honourable men when they are secreted away behind closed doors. Is the national bird safe and clothed in the protection of legislation or is it subjected to cruel and inhumane treatment, having its feathers plucked before it is killed, its neck wrung, and then cooked over a fierce, raging wood fire only to be served and fed to dogs?
What of the National Flag, what is its fate behind closed doors? Is it safe in the company of Honourables? Or is it being used as a welcome mat or a serviette to wipe hands and mouths at the table during a four-course dinner?
Is the Coat-of-Arms mounted in someone’s den and being used as a dartboard by Honourables, grinning and taking careful aim at the African hand, laughing raucously and hurling expletives when the bulls-eye is hit, puncturing it all over, watching it being torn to shreds and permanently defaced?
And having become aware that this is the kind of torture being meted out to these symbols, will the Poinciana, the nation’s National Flower, given to the nation by French Governor Monsieur de Poincy, cringe in fear for its safety, curl itself into an embryonic position, refusing ever to bud and bloom and blossom again, removing itself and its kaleidoscopic adornment of colour and splendour permanently from the landscape?
Reflecting on the conduct in Parliament, nothing should be outside the realms of possibility.
The next time you see one, look closely at the ‘cock and hen tree’, the flamboyant, or Delonix Regia, you may be in for a rude awakening.
The only issues which continue to be hotly debated on the streets, the highways and byways as well as on radio talk shows, have nothing to do with the enactment of VAT. This is not the issue which is igniting the anger in those persons who are still outraged by the poor display in Parliament. The public has fastened itself onto the task of carrying out its own COMMISSION of ENQUIRY into the conduct or misconduct of Honourable Members and seeking to indict their behaviour and actions, which on that day soiled the august Parliament Chamber. The public has named some persons.
On June 18, 1940, in an exemplary erudite address to the House of Commons after Hitler’s armies had conquered Holland, Paris, Belgium and Luxembourg, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill concluded his speech: “Let us therefore brace our selves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that if the British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will say, ‘This was their finest hour’.”
Elsewhere in his address to The House of Commons, and among other things, Prime Minister Churchill also said, “There are many who would hold an inquest in the House of Commons on the conduct of the Governments - and of Parliaments, for they are in it, too - during the years which led up to this catastrophe. They seek to indict those who were responsible for the guidance of our affairs…Let each man search his conscience and search his speeches. I frequently search mine.”
One of the presentations in Parliament on the VAT Bill concluded by proclaiming: “This is our finest hour” or something close. Was it really? Hol’ on, hol’ on, hold on, point of order! Was it really? What about 17 percent?
