I firmly believe in the concept of each voter having one vote of equal value in the political sphere.

My view is that, in Bermuda, we need more than just a constitutional change that will correct the present long-standing inequity of that principle.

It is my opinion that meaningful changes for the Bermudian electorate must include greater opportunities for choice and participation in the political process. These changes must include redrawing of boundaries to reflect an equal distribution of voters and the number of seats, as is being discussed, but should also include the size and makeup of the Senate, and elected parish councils similar to the former elected parish vestries.

The redrawing of constituency boundaries that ignores parish boundaries for the sake of ensuring that there are an equal number of voters in each constituency is a concept that makes me a little uncomfortable. Nevertheless, I could accept it more readily if the other changes, as suggested in the previous paragraph, are also implemented. But first, let me deal with the issue of the number of elected members for the lower house.

Merit can be found in arguments for three basic positions, (a) the status quo, (b) fewer members, and (c) more members.

The real significant change will come in the quality and dedication of members who are elected to fill those seats. If the majority of men and women are unprepared, unable or unwilling to put in the time and to effectively and efficiently do the job for which they are elected, i.e. work for those whom they represent and the overall good of the country, then the number of Members of Parliament becomes irrelevant.

My major concerns, when it comes to the number of members, relate it to the distribution of power within the elected government. Do we remain with the status quo? Do we go for an increase in members? Do we decide on a decrease in members? The questions we must ask ourselves when it comes to the status quo are:

"Are we better off since we increased the membership from 36 to 40?

"Does the legislation that is brought to the house really reflect the views and opinions of both the cabinet and backbench on the government side?

"Does the Opposition response include the views and opinions of the shadow cabinet and backbenchers?"

Even more important: "Does the legislation take into account the views and opinions of the affected individuals, groups or businesses after due consultation?"

If I am to believe my sources (and I do), then much of what goes on in the House is as unsettling and uncomfortable to many of those sitting in Parliament, as it is to those of us in the general public. My opinion is that there is no significant difference in the way we have been governed with 36 members and the way we have been governed with 40 seats under the UBP and are being governed under the present PLP government.

There are those who feel we should increase the number of seats for "better" representation. In theory, it can be argued that with an increase in the number of members, more attention could be paid to the concerns of constituents.

If we were facing enormous increases in the population, then the argument might carry some validity. However, I firmly believe that an increase in members at this time is totally unnecessary and would be a waste of taxpayers' dollars.

I reiterate that the representation the Bermuda public receives is determined by the preparedness, ability, and willingness of those whom we elect to serve as members of parliament and not by numbers.

From the rhetoric and rumours that are circulating, it appears that the PLP government has made a decision on a smaller Parliament. The question is. "How small?"

Rolfe Commissiong stated, in a recent article, that the PLP would be putting forward their views for decreasing the number of seats to 25. I hope he is incorrect. However, if his assertion is correct, than I believe that alarm bells should be sounded.

Bermuda is a very small but very sophisticated and wealthy country by world standards. Do we want to assign the decision making to a handful of our fellow citizens whether they are PLP, UBP, NLP or any other `P'?

Consider this scenario. In a Parliament of 25 seats, a political party could become the government by winning 13 seats. Let's assume that the governing party was to win 14 seats and the opposition, the remaining 11 seats.

Once the speaker has been selected, the governing party would then have 13 members from which to choose a cabinet. In my view, even with a combining of present ministries, there would have to be at least seven to eight ministers.

This would leave a backbench of five or six members resulting in the real power being centred in a cabinet of seven or eight without enough votes from backbenchers to make a difference in caucus. If it were my call, my decision would be made on a Parliament of between 32 to 36 seats.

If the final decision is made to ignore parish boundaries in the redrawing of constituencies, then I feel it is imperative that two additional changes be made in order to facilitate avenues of dialogue for the concerns of the individual parishes. We need to enhance true democracy.

The PLP has promised elected parish councils. It is time for the setting of a time frame for the implementation of this very important change.

There are many issues that are unique to each parish. "Local" governments, with stipulated powers and with defined access to their Parliamentary representatives could go a long way in ensuring that parish concerns have channels for communication and action.

A major constitutional change that I feel should be seriously considered is one that involves the Senate. I am convinced that the time has come for us to move away from the constitutional position of appointed Senate members.

Would we not be moving forward democratically by electing a senate of nine members, one for each parish? If we have constituency boundaries that ignore parish lines, at least we would have senators that would be true parish representatives.

Although they would sit in the Senate, each parish would have a voice in the Parliamentary system that articulates the parish concerns and who would, hopefully, carry some weight in the political decision making process.

We are facing some very interesting times. Are we going to become more democratic through the political changes that will take place or are we going in the other direction?