THE Senate finally passed the Maintenance Bill on Friday, but the process only produced more evidence of the government’s willingness to rely on its majority to roll over the Opposition in Parliament.

The bill includes provisions which are crucial departures from the Jamaican culture of the man as the family provider.

However, it is no doubt seeking to catch up with the liberal international trend that it is the person who is best able to make financial contribution to the family, or a member of the family – be it man or the woman – who should be required to make that contribution.

Consequently, the Maintenance Act will require spouse to maintain spouse (male or female), parent to maintain unmarried children; grandparent to maintain grandchildren; and adults to maintain their parents and grandparents.

It will also change the provisions of the Affiliation Act which currently places the onus on the father to maintain his child.

When the Senate last met to discuss the issue, October 13, Attorney General and Minister of Justice, AJ Nicholson, suggested that he was amenable to the postponement of the closure of the debate and promised to have discussions with stakeholders on eight amendments proposed by him.

Said Nicholson then: “We are sending all of the stakeholders, we are sending copies of the proposed amendments to them.”

The Opposition had interpreted the comment to mean that the Attorney General was finally opening up the matter to public participation by sending the bill to stakeholders for comment.

In that vein, Senator Anthony Johnson, the Leader of Opposition Business, said that Senator Nicholson had recommended that both the Leader of Government Business and the Leader of Opposition meet to discuss the issue.

But the issue Nicholson wanted them to meet on was when the debate would resume, not how public discussion would proceed.

As Senator Whiteman explained: “I believe the member is labouring under a misapprehension. Before we concluded two weeks ago, the discussions to which the Minister of Justice referred was a discussion, which he mooted, between the Leader of Opposition Business and myself, in relation to how much time would elapse between that sitting and when we resume.”

Whiteman said that all he would apologise for was his failure not to convene the meeting with Johnson.

But, it is really a pity that a bill with so much at stake for Jamaicans is being handled this way, and in the Senate of all places.

The first blunder was not to have referred it to a joint select committee, which is essential for any social change of this magnitude. Then there have been so many misunderstandings and blunders, this debate is certainly not indicative of the level of debate we have become accustomed to in the Senate.

We can only look forward to the debate on the bill in the House of Representatives and hope that, for once, the lower House can set an example for the Senate to follow.

balfordh@jamaicaobserver.com