IN what was supposed to have been routine passage of bills in the Senate yesterday to postpone local government and KSAC council elections because of the soon-to-be completed re-verification of the addresses of voters, escalated into procedural controversy, with the opposition accusing the government of double standards.

Conceding that the opposition was correct, as to procedure, Senator A J Nicholson, who said he had received an assurance last week from the Leader of Opposition Business Senator Anthony Johnson that the JLP would not object to the debate yesterday, said he would not seek any assurances next time, but would go by the book and “abide by the rules from now on”.

Before the debate was over, Senator Christopher Tufton (JLP), called for the setting of fixed election dates, for parliamentary and local government elections, and Senator Nicholson, suggested that the holding of local government elections be reviewed in the context of local government reform.

When Senator Colin Campbell (PNP), sought to pilot the Parish Councils Bill and the Kingston and St Andrew Corporation Bill through the Senate, Senator Johnson objected on the ground that the Standing Orders, which governs parliamentary procedures, states that a Bill be laid on the table of the Senate for four days before debate, with the provision that if the Senate agrees, the four-day notice may be dispensed with.

The basis of the Jamaica Labour Party’s complaint was that in March 2005 when the matter of the by-election in West Kingston came up in the Senate, Burchell Whiteman, then leader of government business, insisted on the four-day rule being observed. Now the government wanted to waive that rule for its convenience. A division was taken and the Government prevailed nine to five.

Senator Campbell, in opening the debate, attributed postponement of the elections to the re-verification of the voters’ register, which is due to be signed off by the director of elections on June 30, by when the elections, which are due every three years, should have been held.

“It is of fundamental importance to our democracy that we have a voters’ list that is as current, as comprehensive and as correct as possible,” said Campbell, as he sought postponement of the elections for six months, up to December 31, 2006.

But Senator Arthur Williams (JLP), argued that the re-verification had been going on for more than a year now, and 26 days was all that was needed to call an election, five days to elapse after publication of the voters’ list, five days between the announcement of the election date and nomination day and 16 days thereafter.

“The question therefore, is why a postponement for six months?” Williams asked. Arguing that there was some political strategy involved, Williams said, “If we want to do more than secure political advantage, we must use the six months that they are seeking to really advance the process of local government reform.” He pointed out that the Joint Select Committee to discuss electoral reform, which was established in December 2003, has had only one meeting.

Senator Kern Spencer (PNP), in supporting the Bill, suggested that the system of direct election of mayors be extended to parish capitals and major towns, that fees which parish councils charge for building and other planning approvals be standardised, and that the operations of all parish councils be computerised.

But according to Senator Johnson, he could not have confidence in the re-verication which has left 210,000 people in peril of being left off the voters’ list, despite the fact that they were properly enumerated and had voters cards.

He said the main reasons were that the Electoral Office of Jamaica staff had visited their homes between 9:00 am and 4:00 pm when they were out at work, and that the re-verification was not advertised in the first six months of the project. The logical thing, he said, was for the persons to be informed when the electoral workers were coming, but that was forbidden.

Senator Nicholson said that while accepting the immediate reason for the postponement of the local government elections, “we need to take the occasion to take a little deeper look at the issue of postponing of local government elections”.

He said that of the 13 times since local government elections have been due, since universal adult suffrage in 1944, it was only two times that they have been held in the original time period stipulated by the law. While it was true that those two times were when the JLP was in power, it was also true that some of the times when they were postponed, the JLP was in power.

He said postponement of the elections had become the norm rather than the exception and “this causes us to consider whether we wish to continue with a situation in which compliance with the original intent of the law is so rare”. The situation, Nicholson said, suggested that the existing legal provisions for the holding of local government elections required serious review, particularly in the context of local government reform. “Consideration must be given to making the holding of those elections a constitutional issue,” he said.

Senator Tufton said, however, that there was political manipulation and control on the part of the government as the reason for postponement of the elections.