AS A NEW SESSION OF PARLIAMENT BEGINS, LET THE AXE FALL!

WILL THE RESTORATION OF INTEGRITY BEGIN WITH THIS NEW SESSION OF PARLIAMENT?

A new session of Parliament opens on Thursday, January 5 and it is widely speculated that City attorney, Peter Foster, will be the new House Speaker and Claudius Francis is tipped to be the president of the senate. If the speculations are true, then they both choices are most welcomed.

NEW HOUSE SPEAKER?

Considering the magnitude of the misinterpretations of the standing orders and the constitution which took place in the last parliament, it is fair to assume that the appointment of someone with a background in law to the position of House Speaker may well be a well-thought out move - not only to pre-empt any potential wrong in that direction, but equally to correct the mistakes of the last parliament.

This is not to say that the choice of a legal mind is ideal. Absolutley NO! History has shown that House Speakers with non-legal backgrounds can be highly effective. St. Clair Daniel and Matthew Roberts demonstrated sublime judgment in the dispensation of their functions as House speaker. The simple point is the speaker's knowledge in law maybe a value-added asset, especially when it comes to the interpretation and application of the standing orders and constitution to the conduct of the house proceedings. Amen!

NEW SENATE PRESIDENT?

Another matter worth reflecting on is the irregularity and infrequency of House meetings that characterised the former parliament. Based on the PM's pronouncements, we can be rest assured that this unfortunate trend will be “a thing of the past”.

Perhaps the single biggest anomaly of the last parliament was a general tendency to allow Government MP's to go “way beyond” the realms of rational parliamentary debate by allowing them unlimited latitude to venture deep into extraneous terrain.

I remember the absolute leeway given to Richard and Guy to present pseudo-arguments on Grynberg, cost-overruns and Rochamel. I daresay, if the quality of Parliamentary contributions ever formed the main pre-qualification criterion for re-election of parliamentarians, then Richard, Guy, and King would have been totally rejected by the electorate.

Choiseul was perhaps the lone exception to the rule when it rejected the incumbent. Choiseul/Saltibus made a profound statement to the nation when it rejected bribery and criminality. It's now the turn of parliament to move with haste to enact legislation to disqualify shady and criminal elements or politicians with criminal backgrounds or associations to run for Her Majesty's Parliament.

Let the process of the restoration of integrity to parliament continue . . . and let the axe fall where it must fall!