At the opening of a hotel in Trelawny a few days ago, Prime Minister Andrew Holness found it appropriate to wade into the discussion concerning the removal of The Queen as the country’s head of State.

But politicians need to understand that every venue does not lend itself to commentary on every matter of public importance. There are some matters that demand deeper and weightier analysis than others. I would place constitutional reform in this category. A hotel opening does not lend itself to the kind of cerebral appraisal that such an important matter demands.

In his speech the prime minister postured: “There must not be empty symbolism. It must be genuine. It is what we are in our actions and in our achievements and what we have done. So I am building towards the aspiration.” What exactly he meant by empty symbolism was not spelt out and, indeed, could not have been done at the occasion he addressed. Neither is one not sure about what aspirations he is building towards.

What we do know is that, for the past four decades or more, we have been talking about retiring The Queen and the need to overhaul our constitution to make it more amenable to the present aspirations of Jamaicans and our emerging ethos as a people. We can decide whether we will need an executive or ceremonial president when she is retired, but it is no longer an academic question or empty symbolism that she should be replaced.

As I said in a previous piece, we have had a lot of talk and no action from our politicians on this matter. One gets the distinct impression that when the prime minister speaks about “building toward the aspiration”, whatever that is, it is another attempt to kick the can down the road. Frankly, the lack of energy on the subject coming from a youthful prime minister, who should be at the front and centre of defending our national sovereignty and liberating the country from the vestiges of colonialism with which we have become far too comfortable, is disappointing.

His recent comments do not give one any comfort that he is seized of the gravamen of what needs to be done. How much longer must we wait, while our politicians aspire to whatever nebulous goal?

If by empty symbolism the prime minister means not removing The Queen for the mere sake of doing so, then he should spell out to us what he intends to genuinely replace her with. This can only mean radical constitutional reform in which we take a serious look at the Westminster model and evolve a governance structure more suited to our own aspirations. I agree that it is not enough to remove The Queen and, by extension, the governor general and all that that office represents. It must entail a radical change of our governance structure.

The time for doing so has come, Prime Minister. In fact, it is long past. We must quit dithering and make the change, not for the sake of doing it, but because our national pride as a people calls for it. We must begin a robust dialogue with the people about what we want to help us all to understand the direct correlation between our political and economic health and an enhanced governance structure in our country. Let us work towards this end. Again, let the dialogue begin.

And, while we are at it, let us not get bogged down by obsessing about who should become our new national heroes. Radical constitutional reform of the nature that we need to move this country forward should not be entangled with side debates about who should be named heroes. That is something that can come at a later date. This is especially so when the process of appointing heroes and heroines needs to be revisited. It is a matter that should occupy the nation’s attention and should not be left to a few to decide.

The naming of national heroes should be a rare event. As I wrote in an earlier piece, we are a people obsessed with titles and outsized egos that like to be stroked. I do not believe there is a prime minister who does not believe that he or she is deserving of the title, however badly he or she performed in office. Is this why they are conferred with the Order of the Nation (ON), just a stepping stone from the big title?

There are other ways in which we can honour those who have done outstanding work in the country and the international community. Naming them heroes is not the only option we have. Again, making heroes or heroines of individuals should be a rare event.

So let us cool the talk about heroes. We do not have to ape Barbados in this respect and name new people on our 60th anniversary of Independence. There is enough on the plate to deal with in ending our relationship with the British monarchy and engaging the critical matter of radical constitutional reform. This is one matter I do not believe we can do effectively while obsessing about who should be our new heroes and heroines.

Dr Raulston Nembhard is a priest, social commentator, and author of the books Finding Peace in the Midst of Life’s Storm and Your Self-esteem Guide to a Better Life. Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or stead6655@aol.com.