Dear Editor,

Your editorial of September 24, 2014, titled ‘Badly needed: A Caribbean democracy’, excites a review of constitutions in the region by stating: “Our commitment to democracy remains unswerving, yet it is good sense to ponder whether in its current form the Westminster model is the best vehicle to provide for economic growth in the small states of the Caribbean.”

Your concern is reflected in the views expressed by Member of Parliament Lloyd B Smith in the same publication commenting on Mario Deane’s death. He says: “It is my unapologetic view that human rights should be treated with the same level of scrutiny and urgency as with public safety and economic growth.”

The question of how human rights, public safety and economic growth should be treated in Jamaica with the present Westminster model constitution is also asked by other small states of the Caribbean that are using the same model, as your editorial ponders.

MP Smith’s call for an ‘Independent Human Rights Commission’ is not the answer; we have been trying that approach all the way from Westminster — throwing money at a problem to create another agency of the State intending to deal with what is really one of the trinity of inter-related interests, seemingly involved in a jousting contest for governance. Instead, we should consider a change in the constitution for a holistic approach to our problems with policies and programmes prepared by all the stakeholders for development in the country. The qualification for introducing those policies should not be determined by the ability to win a seat at elections for Parliament.

For a new approach in government, it is critically important to debunk the elitism from the British colonial past and liberate our minds from the notion that the nominated House in Parliament, ie the Senate, is the upper house serving as a review chamber, thereby belittling the position of the people’s representatives.

A nominated House can make better contribution to governance when programmes for growth in the economy, the respect for human rights and public safety are prepared there by persons with the necessary skills and commitment. That would be the Cabinet consisting of people representing entrepreneurship, labour and education — the three pillars for growth in the economy — placing on them the responsibility to initiate policies for development and prosperity in the nation. The remainder of the Cabinet would be for justice, public safety and fundamental social services — the requirements for a stable society. The policies and programmes coming from the Cabinet/Senate will always be subject to review and acceptance by the membership of the elected House before they are passed into law.

In Jamaica, the prime minister would be responsible for any change to the form of government. She enjoys the confidence of the majority of the members of the House and she presides at a Cabinet with ministers appointed by her. Her influence, therefore, permeates both the executive and the legislative arms of government. The buck stops at the prime minister’s desk during her tenure of office, and this would be the challenge for the other small states in the Caribbean that use the same model.

Frank Phipps

Kingston

frank.phipps@yahoo.com