BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – THE “deplorable” conduct of parliamentarians during the recently held Value Added Tax (VAT) Debate is still resonating within the minds of residents of the Federation; so much so that the question of what impact such behaviour can have or had on youths in the twin-island Federation.
Social activist, educator and historian Washington ‘Washie’ Archibald, in an exclusive interview with SKNVibes, said the behaviour of parliamentarians was nothing short of appalling. Washington recalled the days when he, while yet a child, observed parliamentarians who managed to maintain a sense of decorum and dignity.
“I am one of the people who were appalled at the conduct by the parliamentarians some weeks ago. Not all of them but some of them…particularly those on the government side. I remember the days, the old days, as a youngster of 15 and 16 years, my teacher Mr. Hanley used to take us to the Legislative Council meetings. I think he used to do that more for himself that for us, but he used to carry the Standard Seven down there and we used to be treated to really dignified behaviour. Only men were in there at the time, but the behaviour of the men, Robert Bradshaw, Southwell, France, Maurice Davis...the decorum of the place was truly exemplary. And when we went there we knew we had to sit down and listen attentively and intently to the debate which went on.
“Now I am an old man and I still can remember some of those really uplifting and elevating debates that went on between the gentlemen in the Legislative Council. I remember Sir Jeffery Boone; he was a nominated member. Mr. Kelsick was a nominated member and although these men were on opposite sides of what Robert Bradshaw and his colleagues represented, their conduct was dignified and exemplary. And when we left that Legislative Council, we left with a feeling of something that we should try to emulate. That was how I felt in my days.”
Archibald expressed that the difference between the conduct of parliamentarians then and now is as different as night is from day. He said the behaviour of today’s parliamentarians is unacceptable, noting some parliamentarians seem to have adopted a “culture of bad behaviour”.
“We have an upgraded Legislative Council now; it is a part of our independence that we have a parliament which represents, portrays and reflects our independence. But what do we have? You carry a group of youngsters to the parliament to listen, and most of what they see and what jumps out at them is ill behaviour of grown men and the men who misbehave are mainly those who are supposed to be on the government’s side of business in the House.
“…It is bad behaviour! It is the culture of bad behaviour which now seems to characterise our country, and I know it can’t be a good thing for our youngsters to be exposed to this sort of behaviour. Imagine a youngster goes into the parliament and he leaves with the image of the Prime Minister misbehaving himself. The Prime Minister is supposed to be the leader of the country, and when a youngster goes into the place where he could see the Prime Minister in action, what he sees is total and disgraceful bad behaviour.”
His comments about ill behaviour, however, were not limited to those who sit on the government’s side of the House. While he praised the Honourable Leader of the Opposition, Mark Brantley, for his “recommendable” behaviour, Archibald advised that the other Opposition members should “control themselves” and refrain from “getting into offences with the Speaker because the conduct is being viewed on the television. And if they seem to be playing bad crook in the parliament, our people will be seeing it and not only our youth but even our big people who are vulnerable would want to follow those bad examples”.
The impressionable nature of our youths, Archibald asserted, causes them to mimic behavioral patterns which they observe on television, in the home, from their peers and from those persons whom they respect as role models. He further explained that, with the negative influences which continue to present themselves, the ill behaviour of parliamentarians does nothing to strengthen the moral fiber of our society but, rather, could effect further deterioration of it.
“Parents need to feel, when they look at their political leaders, that these leaders will set an example for their children to follow. These leaders should be presenting themselves as role models. Parents should be able to tell their children, ‘Look at Dr. Douglas. Try to be like him.’ But which parent could tell a teenage child to look at Dr. Douglas when his conduct within the parliament is really out of this world?
“I believe that these parliamentarians should take account of the youths of the country, not with lip service alone but by good examples. We have a lot of people who are not parliamentarians who try to provide good examples for our youths. So why can’t these big shots, these highfaluting people, in whom the people have put their trust and call them leaders…feel that it is their duty and obligation to set good examples for our younger generation? It is their duty. They are getting paid for it!”
The teacher informed that he has the hope that parliamentarians would acknowledge the error of their ways and would do better, if only for the sake of the nation’s youths. He however expressed, “I don’t know that the damage isn’t already done…”
