Parliamentary Reform Commission identifies issues to discuss

by Marlon Madden

The group that was established to review the island’s parliamentary processes and procedures has put some issues on the table for national discussion, including whether the current election process should be changed, if a gender quota should be implemented to encourage more female representatives, and whether the range of interest groups being represented in the Senate should be expanded.

Those were among the terms of reference outlined by Chairman of the Parliamentary Reform Commission Sir Richard Cheltenham on Thursday evening at the Barbados Workers’ Union headquarters, as the commission held the first in a series of town hall meetings.

He said that in addition to the current economic, religious and social interests represented in the Upper House, the question should be asked: “Should those categories be widened to include, for example, the elderly, youth, the disabled, the LGBT community [and] small business, while retaining the three interests which are represented to date?”

“Another issue resulting from our terms of reference is how best to make our Parliament more inclusive. Women, for example, have been traditionally underrepresented in Parliament, especially in the House of Assembly. We have to consider how best more women can be encouraged to participate in politics,” he added.

One suggestion, he said, is to set gender quotas.

“Some countries have used that and used it quite successfully. Another view is to encourage the political parties to recruit more women as candidates and offer them support in the election. Some studies have suggested that women are not generally given safe seats by the political parties, or given the same support as men. The question is, how can that be addressed?” said Sir Richard, though indicating that he personally believed women in politics in Barbados were given a lot of support.

Political scientist Peter Wickham said he did not believe the range of Senate representatives should be expanded.

“So, Sir Richard suggested the idea of adding an LGBT representative, and adding a disabled representative and telling the Constitution to identify all of these. I am frankly not comfortable with that arrangement, because it relies on the President to then determine who is the LGBT representative, who is the disabled representative,” he said.

“Currently, there is supposed to be a representative from labour, but there is none because the President, Her Excellency, has obviously determined that labour has had enough representatives in Parliament already anyhow, so you can give the opportunity for something else. My sense is that we have created a situation in which there is a discretion on the part of the President to determine what interest ought to be there and how those interests are represented.”

Wickham further argued that while the Constitution speaks to religious groups being represented in the Senate, over the years, it has mostly been Anglican, with the exception of a Methodist in the past.

“I have never seen a Rastafarian representing religious interest in Parliament. I have never seen a Muslim representing religious interest in Parliament. In fact, I have never seen a Muslim in Parliament, period. Certainly I have never seen Bahai there as well, or a Hindu. I have never seen any of those,” he submitted.

“So the idea of writing into the Constitution that we should have these interests represented creates problems where we may or may not have the ‘right person’. I think the better approach is the idea of having the assumption that if you want to be a representative, you run for a seat,” suggested Wickham, who supports the current first-past-the-post system.

Political scientist Dr George Belle also supported that electoral system, saying that it helped to keep out those who had no interest in representing the people.

He also suggested the use of technology for individuals to have a say on issues of importance to them.

“All they have is a device they can press and say ‘we don’t like what you are all talking about or how ya’ll talking’,” he said, adding that a mechanism should be put in place that allows representatives to face their constituents to answer to “what they have done or not done”.

Belle also suggested a revisit of the titles Sir and Most Honourable, saying that while it has been useful for the British, he was not sure the same could be said for Barbados.

Meanwhile, Sir Richard said despite the passing of the Integrity in Public Life Act by the Senate on Wednesday, a Code of Ethics for parliamentarians and a Public Accounts Committee were needed.

“One of the big issues which we as a commission will have to look at will be ethics, transparency and accountability,” he said.

With the Public Accounts Committee unable to meet due to the absence of a chairperson, who is supposed to be the Opposition Leader, the commission chairman said it “seriously has to be refashioned”.

“One question that arises is whether non-parliamentarians should or should not be on the committee. These are just a few of the many issues on which the commission will focus,” he said.

The Parliamentary Reform Commission’s efforts to determine what changes should be made to Parliament, come almost two years after Barbados officially became a parliamentary republic on November 30, 2021.

Barbados has retained the first-past-the-post electoral system under which the political party receiving the most votes in a general election wins.

Sir Richard said some people have been calling for proportional representation, especially in light of the result of the 2018 and 2022 general elections where the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) won all 30 seats, resulting in there being no parliamentary opposition.

“Others are suggesting that we adopt Sir Henry Forde’s 1998 recommendation to give the opposition, at all times, six Senate seats,” he said. “The responsibility of the Commission is to ensure that this institution – the Parliament – which has served us well, and which has been the springboard for so much progress in a post-Independence period, remains fit for the purpose as we enter our new modern republican era.”

The next town hall meeting of the Parliamentary Reform Commission will be next Thursday, August 24 at the Christ Church Foundation School, Church Hill, Christ Church, at 7 p.m.