Dear Editor,

Recent discussions about the exchange between St James Southern Member of Parliament Nekeisha Burchell and Speaker Juliet Holness has sparked a national debate on using Jamaican Patois in Parliament.

Opinions are divided, but one key point needs acknowledgement: The Standing Orders of Parliament require members to communicate in standard English during proceedings. The Speaker acted according to these existing rules. This issue is not about disrespecting Jamaican culture but about following long-standing parliamentary regulations that have guided conduct for decades.

As a young Jamaican and a representative in youth leadership, I believe we should turn this moment into a chance for meaningful reform rather than political division.

Jamaica is evolving culturally, socially, and politically. Our educational institutions increasingly recognise Jamaican Patois as a valid expression of our identity. In secondary schools, students perform dub poetry, dramatic pieces, and cultural presentations in patois. At the tertiary level, universities study Jamaican Patois in linguistics programmes, literature courses, and cultural studies. The language of Louise Bennett-Coverley, one of Jamaica’s greatest cultural icons, is now studied, preserved, and celebrated internationally.

If Jamaican Patois continues to gain academic and cultural legitimacy, should our Parliament not also consider its place within the nation’s highest legislative body? Instead of viewing this issue as a conflict between parliamentary order and cultural expression, we might start discussions on modernising the Standing Orders themselves.

As Jamaica continues to explore constitutional reform and transition towards becoming a republic, this may be an ideal time to see how our institutions can better reflect Jamaican identity and heritage. A parliamentary motion could be introduced to review whether Jamaican Patois should be formally recognised within parliamentary proceedings alongside standard English, with clear guidelines to maintain professionalism, clarity, and decorum. Such a move would not lessen the importance of English or undermine parliamentary standards. It would recognise the realities of the Jamaican people and strengthen the connection between Parliament and the citizens it represents.

Importantly, this conversation should not be seen as an attack on the Government, the Opposition, or the Speaker of the House. The Standing Orders were established long before many current parliamentarians entered public life. They inherited the system as it exists today. The question before us now is whether this generation has the courage and vision to thoughtfully modernise governance to better reflect modern Jamaica.

Young people across the country want to see institutions that embrace both professionalism and cultural authenticity. We can respect parliamentary traditions while also creating space for greater cultural inclusion. Perhaps the real opportunity in this debate is evolution, not division.

Toshanna Wignall

Communication specialist

toshannakabrina@gmail.com