Electile dysfunction

Ronald Mason

Parliament is the highest legally constituted body in Jamaica. It has awesome powers, duties and responsibility. It can create powerful oversight bodies: The Office of the Public Defender and the Office of the Contractor General are two well-known creatures.

The Houses of Parliament pass laws that affect all the citizens and they have the responsibilities to debate Cabinet proposals, members' motions and establish the policies of the nation. When one contemplates the role of Parliament in our democracy, one is seized with the significance of the institution.

As such, the Parliament should be reflective of the best of us as a people. It must rejuvenate itself from time to time by way of general elections. It accommodates the appointment of senators and each new Parliament is hoped to have numbered among its members the proverbial new blood. As a country, are we in danger of losing this?

We are displaying the tendency to create dynasties in Parliament. Let me illustrate: the Manleys, the Goldings, the Gallimores, the Pearts, the Buchanans, the Williamses, the Phillipses, the Spauldings, the Johnsons, the Vazes, the Robinsons, the Bartletts and the Hays.

Direct offspring

Direct offspring have served in the Upper and Lower Houses. There are others who have tried to gain entry and have been rejected by the people. There are others who are in the internship role, with the very clear interest to follow in the line of succession. The Smiths and the Charleses come readily to mind.

Is this good for our democracy? The question does not find genesis in the characters themselves, but are persons steeped in the mores, norms, patterns and practices which have been displayed by the parents and siblings over many years the best candidates to have membership in Parliament?

What of the desirability for our Parliament to have new infusion of thought, and is there no merit to having a Parliament truly most representative of all the people, rather than some prominent political families?

Surely, we all accept that these beneficiaries of the families have the right to seek membership in Parliament, but is it to be preferred and, possibly, become institutionalised? Is this trend over the first 51 years of our Independence indicative of our dependence on the 'families' for leadership?

Would the state funding of political aspirants lead to a decrease in the number of political dynasties? It is also apparent that this would be difficult to legislate, as it would be discriminatory on its face, but the people, in the exercise of their collective power, could stop this trend by rejecting the dynasty members at the polls.

It is, however, acceptable to discriminate based on personal preference, according to South West St Catherine Member of Parliament Everald Warminton. Mr Warmington has declared that if you do not vote, you do not count. His Mightyship has ruled that all persons must vote; if you do not, you have lost the right to exercise your allegiance to this country in ways other than voting for members of the Gangs of Gordon House.

Mr Warmington, this is NOT your fiefdom. You may have affiliation with voters of South West St Catherine who, by their repeated election of you, leads one to question motive or the level of representation received.

No, Mr Warmington, your behaviour is unacceptable. All citizens have equal rights. You cannot restrict their entitlement to access government services through you as the current MP.

Clearly, your alleged party leader is afraid of you. He sat there and listened to your drivel and chose not to reprimand you publicly. Would it be safe to assume he could be interpreted as sharing your disdain for fellow citizens?

Andrew Holness had the temerity to have supposedly made prospective senators sign questionable documents which limited their independence as senators. This is the person to whom those who choose must allow to be a prime minister of this country?

Look what we have become. Bustamante, who bared his chest in defence of the people, must be turning in his grave at the disdain shown to the people by the current 'leaders' of his party.

demand better representation

We the people must rise and demand better representation. The leader of the Opposition should act in accord with the expectations of the public. His general secretary must not be allowed to declare that it will be discussed within the party, without more specifics as to the timeline for publication of the outcome of such debate. They may not be able to deal with the maverick WARmington, but they seek to form a government.

Do all the people share equal access to the government of the day? Does the party intend to condone the discriminatory demarcation between those who choose to vote and those who do not? What is next? Those who are fat should not be afforded health care? Those who live downtown not get secondary schooling uptown? What next, Messrs Holness, Chang and WARmington?

While on the question of those who lead in Government, why is Scean Barnswell still the mayor of May Pen while he is before the court to answer a charge? The role model aspect of leadership is now of no value. Poor Jamaica.

Ronald Mason is an immigration attorney, mediator, and talk-show host. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and nationsagenda@gmail.com.