There are two concerns that came out of last Tuesday’s sitting in Parliament which should not be glossed over by any well-thinking Jamaican.

The first is the debate on the National Reconstruction and Resilience Authority, (NaRRA) Bill, which is expected to power Jamaica’s recovery from the devastation wrought on the island by Hurricane Melissa. As Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness, under whose ministerial authority NaRRA will be constituted, said the Bill being deliberated on will be one of the most far-reaching and consequential legislation that the country has seen for a long time.

Members of the Opposition People’s National Party (PNP), while agreeing with the need for such an authority, believes the Bill requires considerable reworking given the immense power that is concentrated in the hands of the prime minister and the absence of an acceptable accountability framework for such an important body. The Opposition’s concern seemed all par for the course in the cut and thrust of parliamentary debate on such matters.

What was not anticipated is any member of the ruling Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) rising in support of the PNP’s position and breaking ranks with the party. This occurred when former Attorney General and minister of legal and constitutional affairs, Marlene Malahoo Forte, rose to offer her comments on the legislation. She agreed that it needed reworking and could not be accepted in its present form. The JLP was obviously stunned by the nature of her intervention, but the Opposition delighted in it and even gave her a standing ovation.

In what should have been a matter of course and no great surprise, many people were taken aback that she had taken this stance against her party. Given the nature of our tribal politics, their reaction is well understood, because such opposition to one’s party is as rare as hen’s teeth. It is simply not done if you intend to maintain the support and favour of your party. This is not the norm in the kind of tribalised political culture we have cultivated in Jamaica since Independence. What is normal is complete fealty to the party. You oppose at your own political peril, especially when the stakes are as high as that of the NaRRA Bill.

Some people have said, and I do not doubt that there are members of the JLP who believe it, that Malahoo Forte is demonstrating sour grapes at not being given any ministerial position or high office in the Government after the last election. To the extent that this is so, it is a low blow.

Her presentation was as measured as it was cogent, depicting her admirable style of presentation on legal matters. You could sense in her presentation that she had a sense of the pushback she was likely to get. Some characterised her posture as bravery, but I would prefer to think that it was fidelity to a set of principles which she holds dear and could not help but express. Obviously, her relegation to the backbenches is serving the country well, at least in this instance.

As we are on the subject, the incident does bring into focus once again the question of why she was not given a ministerial position or any high office in Government, given the high status she enjoyed in previous JLP administrations. Her bona fides as an intelligent person with a good work ethic and patriotic loyalty to her country have been well established. Is she being prepared to take over as the next governor general?

I am pleased that the society at large has greeted her intervention with the requisite praise. It is the kind of intervention, though rare, that we would expect from our parliamentarians in any well-respected democracy, such as that which we are seeking to build in Jamaica. The people, especially the independent voter, has an instinct for that which is right. To date, we have not had an official response from her party, and one hopes that it will not descend into the imbecility of ‘putting her in her place’.

The second matter relates to the stance taken by Phillip Paulwell, leader of Opposition business in the House regarding the Speaker sitting on parliamentary committees. His and ostensibly his party’s position is that to maintain impartiality in the execution of her function as Speaker, she should not be engaged in the cut and thrust of partisan politics that is often practised in parliamentary committees. She is a member of the Public Administration and Appropriations Committee (PAAC) and has clashed on occasion with its chairman, Peter Bunting. She also chairs the intensely partisan Constituency Development Fund (CDF) committee.

This column agrees that the Speaker should only chair those committees for which her presence is strictly needed, such as the Standing Orders Committee and the Committee on Privileges. What is any Speaker doing chairing a constituencies and boundaries committee in a still very tribalised political culture? She should resign from these committees and serve on those directly related to her functions as Speaker.

The Speaker has to be above the political fray even while serving his/her constituency with fervour. He/She must not only act impartial, but should be perceived as such. To be a Speaker of any Parliament is itself a demanding position, and it is best that he/she avoid any appearance of partiality that may bring the office into disrepute.

Dr Raulston Nembhard is a priest, social commentator, and author of the books Finding Peace in the Midst of Life’s Storms; Your Self-esteem Guide to a Better Life, and Beyond Petulance: Republican Politics and the Future of America. He also hosts a podcast — Mango Tree Dialogues — on his YouTube channel. Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or stead6655@aol.com.

Raulston Nembhard