Historian Professor Pedro Welch believes the new Barbados Constitution need not be explicitly “revolutionary” but must focus heavily on giving citizens a greater say in decision-making and the tools to hold the Government accountable.
He expressed that view during a recent Barbados Museum & Historical Society online discussion entitled Tracking the Historical Development of a Barbados Constitution: Identifying key moments in the Historical Record.
Some social commentators have been calling for significant changes to be incorporated into the new Constitution of Barbados which is slated to be ready by the end of 2024.
However, Professor Welch said: “We have a parliamentary system that, for all of its encrusted history, all of the racism that we can associate with it in its past, all of the social ills that we can identify, has worked reasonably well and that same parliamentary system has been used by successive black governments to effect changes.”
“There are some persons who might argue that what we need in this situation is what they call revolutionary change. When I look at governments in places like Cuba and other places, although there are revolutionary changes that are taking place in those countries, you look at the structure of their assemblies, they still bear a generic connection and relationship to the imperial colonial system that we see today.
“What I would recommend is that there has to be a way in any constitutional change, a way to guarantee access of the masses to the citadels of power,” he added.
Professor Welch emphasised that any noteworthy changes should center around giving citizens greater access to their representatives, and a bigger say in future policies and amendments affecting the country, with the aim of closing the divide between the Government’s actions and the views of the people.
“We still have a fairly large divide between the structure of what we call Parliament, its traditions, and the people outside in the street. The people in the street tend to only get involved largely around election time, but between elections, there is not normally a system that enables a greater interface with people in their localities and parliament.
“In a very real sense, a lot has not changed, and that is one of the areas that I would recommend that some change must come,” he said.
The historian said although the push toward a higher level of local governance as stated in the Thorne Commission Report was a good move, accountability and deeper oversight on actions by the Government should be enshrined into the final draft of the Constitution.
“It’s not enough for a political party or a parliamentary representative to make a proclamation or pronouncement for the masses, there has to be a way to get feedback. Find out what the masses really want, and let the masses have a place where they get to demand what they want,” he said. (SB)
