PRESIDENT of the Jamaica Teachers’ Association (JTA), Dr Mark Smith, says political preference has nothing to do with educators’ disgruntlement over various aspects of the Jamaica Teaching Council (JTC) Bill that was recently passed by the Senate and is now before the House of Representatives.

“I want you to recognise the importance of the need to fix the Bill. This is not about posturing. We have no interest in politics despite all the political craziness that is part of our political season and we sense it in the air. We speak and stand upon truth while fighting for the rights of our teachers,” he said on Monday at a news conference at JTA’s headquarters on Church Street in Kingston.

“Our fight is not against any political party. I want to make it clear. In fact, under the stewardship of this organisation, I have ensured that we have stayed clear of any alignment to any political party. The truth is that our teachers of this country hail from both political parties and some have no political affiliation. What we are talking about is ensuring that the teachers are not maligned because of a poorly constructed bit of legislation,” Smith said, adding that the proposed Bill in its current form is unacceptable.

It was Smith’s belief that serious legal issues will come to the fore if the Bill is passed, and he described it as far too bureaucratic and poised to impose greater burden on teachers than there is already.

“They are attempting to improve the perception of the profession while, in the same breath, seeking to criminalise individuals who are teaching. There are some who have decided to hijack the discussion and say that there should not be paedophiles in the teaching service. Absolutely, the JTA supports that. We do not want murderers and thieves among our ranks.

“We do not want individuals who are involved in rape and other illegal activities, but the point is, at the end of the day, we fundamentally believe that this is not the focus of any of our attempts to change those structures. We support those aspects of the Bill. The ones we have outlined are structural and constitutio it relates to the rights of teachers, the concept of natural justice and fairness for our educators.”

While he agreed with parts of the Bill which outlines that criminals and people of nefarious character should not be a part of the teaching profession, Smith said the proposed Bill is far too strict. He expressed concern that under the proposed Bill, it would allow for a teacher who has been accused of an offence to have their case tried before the council and during that process, there would be no provisions made for that teacher to be able to teach.

“There is a suspension of your license and you are not allowed to teach. It is not an interdiction. Once your license is suspended, you cannot teach, which means a loss of revenue. There is no structure in terms of it being time specific. It almost implies that there is a presumption of guilt. That is counter to the very principle of how natural justice is expected to be practised.

“The Bill in its current form transgresses both the education regulations and the labour code. What this means is that if made law, it will supersede many of the statutes and existing structure within existing bills, and we are concerned about this. The Bill will compromise procedural fairness and natural justice. The enactment of this law will reduce the power of school boards and undermine their rights to discipline their employees and teachers,” Smith stated.