The Senate has taken the decision to suspend Senator KD Knight from two sittings of that once august body. This is for remarks that he made to Senator Dorothy Lightbourne who is also the minister of justice. The suspension brings into sharp relief a matter about which this writer has called attention before – the incivility that bedevils discourse in the Parliament of our land.

Indeed, it is not only in the upper house that this behaviour is confined. We see it on perhaps a more aggressive level in the lower house where it will be just a matter of time that we see physical altercations erupt, as has been the case in other jurisdictions. One fears that in a case like that it might not only be rubber bands that might be “fired” from one side to the other, but deadly implements of warfare.

It is bad enough in the lower house, but infinitely worse in the upper house which is supposed to be the more deliberative of the two bodies where ideas are debated with finesse and calm resolve, and not the boorish “cass-cass” we see today. From the exchanges we have seen between Senator Knight and Senator Lightbourne, it is clear that there is no love lost between the two. Their relationship in Parliament seems to be characterised by mutual disrespect. If this observation is correct, then this is indeed sad. The often vitriolic exchanges between the two in the Senate do not augur well for the reputation of that body. Neither does it help to induce any confidence in our young people in politics nor in the Parliament in general, being a place where proper decisions can be made on their behalf. Mr Knight ought to be concerned when he reviews replays of his speech on the Senate floor as to whether he is pleased that this is what he is happy with. The occasion of his suspension is a more precise case in point. He comes across as an angry man who would rather be relaxing working in a vegetable garden at the back of his house, as my colleague Mark Wignall has suggested is a useful “hobby” for some politicians who seem to have outspent their usefulness. This behaviour does not look good and it certainly will not win friends any time soon.

This brings into wider perspective the death of civility in wider national discourse. And this is not only a matter with which Jamaica is wrestling, but seems to be part of a virus of incivility that has infected the globe. Perhaps it was spawned by the recession. Take, for example, what is happening in the United States. The debate and now passage of the health-care reform bill has opened up a Pandora’s box of incivility not seen in recent American history. The development of the so-called Tea Party in August of last year did not only show how angry Americans can be about a national policy, but how belligerent and downright nasty they can become when they disagree with others.

On the weekend when the vote was to take place on the bill, Tea Party and assorted activists who were gathered at the Capitol building hurled epithets and threats at members of Congress as they made their way into the building. Two black congressmen were called the “N” word; one was spat upon, and Barney Frank, one of the most influential members of Congress, and a confessed homosexual, had homophobic epithets hurled at him as he and his partner entered the chamber.

As things turned out, this was just the tip of the iceberg. As soon as the dust settled on the vote all kinds of incendiary rhetoric could be heard from those in and outside of Congress who were opposed to the bill. The lives of members of Congress and in some instances their families, were threatened. Physical violence was used at the offices of at least two members of Congress. Never before have we seen this level of vitriol surrounding a piece of legislation. In the past people would disagree and do so vehemently, but never with an inducement to violence and mayhem as we now see in the present environment.

My fear is that things will get worse before they get better. Reactions to the health-care reform bill will look like a Sunday school picnic compared to the full-scale war that will be engaged when comprehensive immigration reform is engaged. And that will be the next big legislative hurdle on the president’s agenda. Expect the most racial and bigoted approach from the opponents of immigration reform. The Rush Limbaughs, Glenn Becks, Sarah Palins and their assorted acolytes will be foaming at the mouth and asking for nothing short of the dismemberment of the union.

But back to Jamaica. The government has announced the 2010-2011 budget with greater details to be presented soon by the minister of finance. For the first time in a long time the country has an opportunity to put the economy and the country on a path to sustained growth and prosperity. This will not happen in an atmosphere of incivility and petulant debate. The people of Jamaica want to see their elected representatives debate matters in a cogent, rational and calm way. One is not saying that they should not defend their positions with vigour, but they should do so with rationality and mutual respect for the opinion of others. We do not want to see our parliamentarians behave as if they have more hardware than software between their ears. We will be watching.

stead6655@aol.com

www.drraulston.com