EDITORIAL: Republic and constitutional change in Barbados
Since July 26, the Day of National Significance, when Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley announced that Barbados would become a parliamentary republic on November 30 this year, there has been much debate regarding whether or not Barbados should be a republic, what type of republic it should be and whether or not there should be a referendum.
As the Prime Minister announced the plans, she also revealed that there will be a Charter of Barbados created and brought to Parliament before November 30, and that starting December 1, the country will begin the journey to settle the new Constitution of Barbados, with input from the people.
Now many have argued that the Government should hold a referendum on the question of a republic, to decide as a people, whether the change should be made. There is also an argument being made, that amending the Constitution after removing the Governor General and appointing a President, is essentially putting the cart before the horse, and these are matters that the Government should certainly seek to address head on as soon as possible.
Should the Government go forward as it intends, it must ensure that the changes being made to the Constitution are well thought out and not done in a haphazard fashion. As the Constitution essentially sets out the powers and duties of Government and the rights of the people, we can ill afford to make mistakes. Certainly, those tasked with settling the new Constitution are doing so at a time when we are enduring unprecedented challenges brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, but they must not allow any of those protocols that may be put in place to protect the society in the face of this health and economic crisis, to prevent them from engaging as wide a cross section of Barbadians, at home and abroad, as possible.
Now, if we are creating a new Constitution, it would have to reflect the obvious changes – a President as the Head of State and all the criteria associated with choosing such a person and their duties. But it would be remiss of the Government, not to also address some of the issues, which quite frankly before the last general election, was not in the contemplation of Barbadians – namely the absence of a duly-elected Opposition.
While Barbados had, on previous occasions, come close to one political party winning all the seats in the House of Assembly, it was not until 2018 that it actually occurred. It meant that for the first time there was no Leader of the Opposition and the appointment of Opposition Senators to the Senate was in jeopardy. Those issues were solved somewhat when Bishop Joseph Atherley parted ways with the Barbados Labour Party, within days of being elected, and was sworn in as the Opposition Leader. While the crisis was averted then, the possibility still looms over our heads should such a thing happen again.
Taking that in account, perhaps consideration should be given to how Senators are appointed to allow the political party with the second highest number of total votes cast, to appoint senators. It would mean that even if they do not attain any parliamentary seats, their voice and the voices of those who voted for them could be represented. Perhaps too, consideration should be given to increasing the number of senators, and how many are appointed by the Government, the Opposition and the Governor General, soon to be President. The current makeup is 12, 7 and 2 respectively. Having faced the electorate, a case could also be made for the Opposition to have more than two representatives in the Senate.
One could also argue that if we are going to look at a new Constitution, then matters of how Prime Ministers are chosen, term limits on the holders of such office and the matter of representatives crossing the floor, could also be looked at.