“Every institution must change and develop, or it will die. Parliament is no exception...”The change I am talking about is the Parliamentary Process. The Improvement of the effectiveness of Parliament and the political system in general. A change to make the Democratic institution more representative, responsible, and relevant to the average man and woman of Bermuda.

Bermuda has the distinction of possessing the second oldest Parliament in the Commonwealth and throughout our history to large degree it has served us well. During those many years we have had many changes, which have improved our democratic system. Changes such as:

[bul] The right for women to vote

[bul] The removal of property vote

[bul] A constitution, a feature rare among Dependent Territories

[bul] Single seat constituency

[bul] Introduction of an Ombudsmen (included in the UBP 2003 platform)

Despite our remarkable strides it is important that we continuously look at our Democratic system to ensure that it does not favour anyone particular group or political party.

Our Parliamentary system is broken down between the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. The Legislature being the members whom are elected to represent the people, the Executive which is the Premier and the Cabinet and the Judiciary being those legal minds which interprets the Law.

Due to this separation, Parliament must ensure its independence from the Executive. Unfortunately Parliament over the years has become a rubber stamp of the Executive.

In politics, expediency often takes the place of simply doing right by the people we represent. Trying to score political cheap points for the advancement of one party over the other rather than tangibly improving the lives of our people. Yes, this behaviour is symptomatic of the Westminster System, and yes, this is how it has been done for hundreds of years — both here and throughout the world, but is there a better way.

Under our Parliamentary system, party discipline is strong and can even be rigid. MP’s have only limited scope for independent action, if they wish to retain the favour of their Party. The party system has become inseparable from modern government, to the extent that, provided the government has a majority, the powers of parliament have in effect become the powers of government.

Let me make it very clear that I support the Party system as it allows a group of individuals to put forward a platform — policies and general principle to which their supporters adhere.

The problem is that some MPs either blindly support their Party or refuse to challenge or oppose decisions that they find reprehensible. What we need is more independence for representatives outside of Cabinet and more free votes as a means of improving the system and making members more responsible and accountable to the voters. Members must be allowed to truly represent the people rather than being interchangable pawns in the hands of party whips.

I have seen times when individuals strongly disagree with the position of their Party and if they had voted with the opposition, they would have defeated the Government’s motion. But, because the game is played a certain way, the Governing party won, but the people of Bermuda lost. I strongly believe that the time has come when we should revisit our political process so that the people win,

Part of our problem is the political process:

[bul] the lack of accountability of political parties,

[bul] too much power already residing in the hands of Ministers; and

[bul] the problem of the Houses of Parliament being neither representative nor much more than a rubber stamp.

Political reform would mean creating better governance. What is wrong with having a system that allows the backbencher to vote with the Opposition without necessarily evoking a vote of no confidence in the Government?

What is wrong with having committees within parliament to review legislation before coming to Parliament?

What is wrong with having committees open to the public to hear testimonies from people on allegation of corruption within a Government?

What is wrong with a Government Minister being required to appear before a select committee to answer allegations of abuse of power?

What is wrong with allowing the Opposition to bring forward motions other than a take note motion?

What is wrong standing with the best and brightest of both parties standing shoulder to shoulder in unity on the issues where we have found common ground?

What is wrong with believing that the government doesn’t hold the exclusive franchise on good ideas and that they should be able to embrace good ideas and solutions developed by the Opposition?

Parliament currently has several committees such as the House and Grounds and Public Accounts committee. Our Parliamentary system however, needs to implement more committees within our democratic process. Committees that would make Parliament more responsive, member’s roles more relevant and the democratic process more accountable to the views of the people.

The suggestion of committees is not new; it has been advocated by my colleague The Hon. John Barritt time after time. The suggestion even went to the rules and Privilages committee of the house of Parliament but was rejected by the Progressive labour Party.

Often legislation is brought to Parliament which is complicated and needs closer scrutiny. A Legislative committee could be created to review such legislation. Reference to the committee could be made before consideration of the principle bill in the house, or it could be recommended by the house before it goes into committee of the house to be put before the Legislative committee. The Legislative committee should be able to solicit public input

Another committee which would be effective is a Financial Committee. Currently the Ministry of Finance prepares the budget of revenue and expenditure under a veil of strict secrecy. Members of Parliament are not allowed to move amendments to increase the budgeted allotments or to propose that the vote be reduced.

A Financial Committee could be used to:

[rt] Review in detail the estimates of each department.

[rt] Call in witnesses from departments with their Ministers to justify expenditure.

[rt] Public opinion could be sought, and

[rt] The committee could be allowed to move motions to raise or lower departmental estimates within the total money vote.

Other changes that could be considered to improve our democratic process:

[bul] Independent Speaker appointed by the Governor (2003 United Bermuda Party Platform)

[bul] A Parliamentary committee to over see the working of Parliament and to whom all staff working at Parliament would come under.

[bul] All committees be open to the public except in extreme circumstances (2003 United Bermuda Party Platform)

[bul] Parliament should have a research resource such as a full time librarian, to provide assistance to Members of Parliament so that they could perform their work and debate at a higher standard.

Bermuda has become a very complex society, it is important that we as Leaders use every tool at our disposal to ensure that we make decisions that are in the best interest of the people of Bermuda.

We can no longer be satisfied with what has worked for us in the past . We must make serious changes in our democratic process if the continued growth and success of Bermuda can be protected for the generations yet unborn.

To this end I call on my Party to Lead and request the Progressive Labour Party to support a Commission which would recommend ways to improve our Democratic Process.Wayne Furbert is the Shadow Housing Minister and the United Bermuda Party MP for Hamilton West.