Dear Editor,
The
Jamaica Observer news story headlined ‘Government, Opposition settle Portmore councillor issue’ of Thursday, November 10, 2016 inadequately conveys the full extent of statements made by Dr Peter Phillips in Parliament on Wednesday, November 9.
While the Government was initially seeking to proceed to a second reading and debate of the Bill – An Act to Amend the Local Government Act – Dr Phillips indicated that the Government was treading on “dangerous ground”. He explained that since the creation of the Electoral Commission of Jamaica (ECJ), by convention agreed between both political parties in Government and Opposition, the determination of constituency and divisional boundaries and related issues are always referred to the ECJ for its consideration and guidance so as to reduce political tensions.
Following a meeting involving the prime minister, leader of the Opposition and a small team, an agreement was reached to give notice of second reading only and to refer the Bill to a committee of Parliament to be named.
Thereafter, Dr Phillips noted that following the meeting he was not “of the view that the Government had any intention of trampling on the role of the ECJ”, but that the original intention of the Government to have proceeded to debate and pass the Bill without consideration being given to the views of the ECJ on the matter, could give the appearance that the Government was, in fact, trampling on the role of the ECJ.
Pauline Stone-Myrie
pstonemyrie36@gmail.com
The
Jamaica Observer news story headlined ‘Government, Opposition settle Portmore councillor issue’ of Thursday, November 10, 2016 inadequately conveys the full extent of statements made by Dr Peter Phillips in Parliament on Wednesday, November 9.
While the Government was initially seeking to proceed to a second reading and debate of the Bill – An Act to Amend the Local Government Act – Dr Phillips indicated that the Government was treading on “dangerous ground”. He explained that since the creation of the Electoral Commission of Jamaica (ECJ), by convention agreed between both political parties in Government and Opposition, the determination of constituency and divisional boundaries and related issues are always referred to the ECJ for its consideration and guidance so as to reduce political tensions.
Following a meeting involving the prime minister, leader of the Opposition and a small team, an agreement was reached to give notice of second reading only and to refer the Bill to a committee of Parliament to be named.
Thereafter, Dr Phillips noted that following the meeting he was not “of the view that the Government had any intention of trampling on the role of the ECJ”, but that the original intention of the Government to have proceeded to debate and pass the Bill without consideration being given to the views of the ECJ on the matter, could give the appearance that the Government was, in fact, trampling on the role of the ECJ.
Pauline Stone-Myrie
pstonemyrie36@gmail.com