IT was quite the contrast, Mr. Editor, this week to last in the House on the Hill: there was no Round Two. Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition elected not to respond in kind following last week's display by the Premier on the motion to adjourn. Instead the leader of the Opposition United Bermuda Party, Wayne Furbert, read from a prepared statement in which he deplored the language and behaviour which punctuated the Premier's attack on fellow MP Grant Gibbons, and called on members, with the help of the Speaker, to raise the level and standard of debate on the Hill - if such speeches constitute debate, Mr. Editor. "We owe it to the people of Bermuda and to ourselves as their representatives to engage in a free exchange of ideas and plans without resorting to language that inflames and poisons", said Wayne. "It only distracts and diverts and makes progress more difficult."

Good stuff, Mr. Editor, and an approach with which I can agree.

The challenge is to stick to it. That's always the hard part. But at least Wayne was able to get us off to a good start.

First off, it's unusual to get to read a prepared statement. The Rules state that members shall not read speeches and only use notes to refresh their memories. Sure, there were murmurs of criticism from the Government benches - which is to overlook members over there who think nothing of reading lengthy, laborious statements prepared for them - but on this occasion the Opposition Leader had cleared it with the Speaker. He wanted to send a clear signal - and for that there's nothing like a written record.

The murmuring didn't persist. That was a change too. Mind you, Mr. Editor, it may have had something to do with the fact that Premier wasn't there. His Deputy Paula Cox was standing in as Acting Premier. The gallery was also practically empty, not surprisingly, it was mid afternoon and the House was finishing up earlier than expected, thanks to the Premier who, in his additional capacity as Minister for Transportourism, decided not to proceed (without explanation) with legislation which appears to provide for the introduction and more widespread use of mini-buses. [GPS, limousines and now mini-buses: Death and taxis, Mr. Editor, is there nothing more certain?]

But back to the main plot. The Opposition Leader disclosed that he had also written to the Speaker. He's the Man who is there to maintain dignity and decorum - and to enforce the Rules. One of them is the rule forbidding unparliamentary language. The specific Rule reads that "it shall be out of order to use offensive and insulting language about Members of the House or to use language which is in bad taste or which tends to bring the House into disrepute."

[Now that you ask, Mr. Editor, there is no express rule about threatening each other with physical violence. I guess no one thought of that. Before now. Although there is a rule which states that members are supposed to enter or leave the House "with decorum'.]

But I'm losing the plot again. Apologies, Wayne.

For our part, as our leader explained, the United Bermuda Party remains committed to better governance, which will include a Code of Conduct for parliamentarians, which, among other things, will outlaw the use of racial slurs, but not outlaw debate on the subject of race. We also have some definite ideas on how we can improve the ways in which we conduct the people's business, and this will include a Question Period which will allow for the direct questioning of Government Ministers on issues of the day, as well as the greater use of bi-partisan committees to bring about greater scrutiny of legislation and Government spending, the meetings of which will be open to the press and public.

The goal is to make sure that all governments of Bermuda, PLP or UBP or AOP, become more transparent and more accountable for their actions as well as more responsive to the needs of the people they profess to serve.

It might also interest you and your readers to know, Mr. Editor, that all of this occurred in the week in which, co-incidentally, a Commonwealth Parliamentary Association study group published its "Recommended Benchmarks for Democratic Legislatures". You may remember that this august group met in Bermuda some weeks ago to finalise the document. The seven-page paper makes for more than just interesting reading, and let me share with you but one part:

"ETHICAL GOVERNANCE

"Transparency and Integrity

1.1 Legislators should maintain high standards of accountability, transparency and responsibility in the conduct of all public and parliamentary duties.

1.2 The legislature shall approve and enforce a code of conduct, including rules on conflicts of interest and acceptance of gifts.

1.3 Legislatures shall require legislators to fully and publicly disclose their financial assets and business interests.

1.4 There shall be mechanisms to prevent, detect, and bring to justice legislators and staff engaged in corrupt practices."

I need make no further comment except to say that this is no tsunami, Mr. Editor, just part of a wave of parliamentary reform that should have reached our shores a long time ago. We'll see.Figure it out

WHAT a difference a week makes, Mr. Editor. Sort of.You will recall a couple of weeks ago Opposition Leader Wayne Furbert asked the Premier how much Government was going to be paying his new Press Secretary and his new Chief of Staff and his consultant on race relations. Instead of an actual direct answer we got some sort of fuzzy reply that said their salaries were comparable to those paid in the civil service and private sector for similar such posts.

What's an Opposition to do? Simple really, re-submit the questions and ask again precisely what they are being paid in dollars and cents - and of course the Rules require them to be re-submitted ten days in advance.

Except we won't have to wait until today for the answers. They were actually delivered to the Opposition Leader last Friday - based on the first set of questions. Go figure.

On second thought, don't.

You now know that the Press Secretary, the former PLP PRO Scott Simmons, signed on for $102,000.00 a year and his Chief of Staff, Senator Wayne Caines, for $102,000.00. The new race consultant Rolfe Commissioning gets $7,965.83 a month on what appears to be a six-month contract that expires in mid-May next year.

That's almost an extra quarter of a million dollars that has to be found in the Government budget. Who says loyalty does not have its rewards Mr. Editor, and its price too - all at the taxpayer's expense>

The Christmas rusU>

STOP the presses, Mr. Editor, here we go again. The Christmas recess is upon us and so too, is the all too typical legislative rush to bang through Bills. Some eleven pieces of legislation were tabled two weeks ago and an extra sitting scheduled for Wednesday this week so we can tackle them all and be gone for the holidays as of today. At least that was the plan.

Some of the items which we were asked to review and consider in short order are significant, and in some instances, quite major, including amendments to the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Act and the holding of land by non-Bermudians, which will also feature legislation to regulate land-holding trusts to curb suspected fronting.

There were also amendments to the Bermuda Monetary Authority Act as well as to the Companies and Insurance Acts, and a whole new piece of legislation, 54 pages of it, entitled the Investment Funds Act. To top it all off, we also have amendments to the Criminal Code to enhance protection of children from sexual exploitation.

Reading, reviewing and understanding are challenging enough, but it becomes that much more difficult when members are asked to do justice to the country's business in a limited time frame - and on the eve of Christmas to boot.

Can anyone tell me why, after the lengthy summer recess, and five weeks since resumption of Parliament, they all have to come down at once?

Actually, Mr. Editor, it's no longer a question. Sadly, it's become an annual fact

The same old new same old, you might say, in a same old new Bermuda on the HilGo fish

YOU'VE heard the expression before, Mr. Editor, be careful what you wish for. This week read what you fish for — based on last Friday's debate on a second set of amendments to the 1972 Fisheries Act. We did a first batch less than six months ago.We spotted this, this time around: an amendment to allow the Minister responsible to prohibit fishing in an area already designated a protection area within the exclusive economic zone around Bermuda.

Huh? It seemed odd - at the very least - to be giving the Minister the power to ban fishing in an area in which fishing is already banned.

Oops! Sorry that, we were told, that was a mistake. The Government actually wanted to give the Minister the power to temporarily ban fishing in areas that were not protected areas.

Now that makes sense.

If this is what we catch on a trawl of legislation on the floor of the House, you are not all at sea if you wonder what actually slips through unnoti.

PS

SPEAKING of fishing, Mr. Editor, how about this as Line for the Week for this week that was:

A lot of old timers will tell you that there is nothing quite like a good evacuation from time to time to keep you in tip top shape, but all of Dockyard?