Think of it, if there is only one member of parliament who is not a member of the ruling party, then that one person would become the Leader Of The opposition in Parliament, and that one person would now be able to recommend the 8 Opposition Senators and the Government side would nominate 13. That one Opposition member has the authority now to appoint 8 Senators who he could use to block a decision made by the 62 democratically elected persons in the Legislature. Constitution or no constitution, that is just not right.
Suppose only two members of the house are not members of the governing party and they cannot agree who will be the Leader of The Opposition, who would then be the leader of the opposition? Would the Governor General representing the King make that decision as to who should be the Opposition Leader?
These are things to think about, and you should make your voices be heard. Click on the link below and express yourself in the Questionnaire, which the link below will take you to:
Time to vote. Click here and vote on the issues.
Note:
Please ensure that this blog spreads like wild fire across the nation. Time for us to stand up and let our voices be heard. Ensure that your friends respond to the questions on the questionnaire. Thanks.
.jpg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
9 comments:
They should have voted & then have a discussion with the government as to the way forword
The constitution of jamaica gives the people of jamaica only one guarantee....one of the two gangs will form the government.....David Coore told us on record.. to give justifiable rights to the people would derogate from parliment
The thing is that the Senate is provides a good balance because my impression is that these are thinking minded and mostly not political Zombies.I think the Senate are more protectors of our democracy a buffer detween the people and a potentially dictatorial,authoritarian and oppressive governments led by let's say "dunce thugs or gunman shifts protocols".
My short answer is yes sir.Remember critical thinking is a key ingredient and a society that has no more than 15%capability ie functionally literate of the population then a 88% illiteracy overall and 83% literacy among males may I add it is 93% for females therein lay a serious crisis of rational long term critical thought.My assessment is that the Senate has more thinkers than the Parliament itself who has not a lot of die hard political axes to grind.Remember also today Fi yuh tomorrow Fi mi.
Senate go on and do your duty well regardless of any backlash from media,those with economic power who really have political power keep on doing your constitutional duty to maintaining what is left of JAMAICA'S democracy and Human Rights.
No! That would be chaos!!
So two persons should be allowed to select a few critical thinkers for us for the Senate because the people are not competent to select members of the Senate. Probably that is what those critical thinkers of the past thought. That is why the landless could not vote, women could not vote and blacks could not vote. Probably we should test people's critical thinking capabilities before allowing them to vote.
Why do we always criticize "them"? How many of us take the time and trouble to let our political representatives know our position on matters affecting us, whether economic, social, educational, crime and security, roads and transportation, etc, etc.? Very few. Why are there so many "anonymous" comments in response to this and other similar articles? How many know who is, or how to contact, their Member of Parliament or Corporation (Parish) Councillor? For as long as we remain armchair experts, and not make direct contact with and put direct pressure on our elected representatives, for so long will we slide into them being relatively indifferent to our fundamental needs. The Senate is supposed to provide a balance to the very possible authoritarian dictatorship that would ensue without that balance. Irrespective of the opinion of the naysayers, Jamaica has a democratic record that is second to none. Where we fall severely short is in us as citizens holding our elected leaders accountable.
Any person who had been rejected by the electorate should not be able influence any decision, whether for or against, a decision made by the democratically elected members. That just does not make any sense at all.
We have been miseducated to believe that democracy is the best political system to the extent we now believe that Jamaica has a democratic record that is second to none?
Please clarify.
Is a democratic system the most effective system of getting things done? Not from Jamaica's record of under performance.
Post a Comment