PLP set to oppose fixed term elections

Make text smaller Make text larger

Government’s proposal to legislate a fixed date for general elections every five years will likely be keenly opposed by the Opposition Progressive Labour Party.

And with a slim majority in the House of Assembly, there’s no guarantee that the One Bermuda Alliance’s general election platform proposal will prevail.

The UK moved to fixed term elections last year. But early elections can be called if a vote of confidence is carried in the House of Commons or if two thirds of MPs agree that an election should be held. Otherwise general elections are now held every five years in the UK.

New Opposition MP Walton Brown noted that, in Bermuda’s case, an election can be called if a money bill — such as the Budget — fails, or if there is a majority vote of no confidence in the government.

Both scenarios are strong possibilities given that the Government only leads the Opposition by two seats.

Mr Brown believes that a fixed term parliament is incompatible with the political system because a Government can manipulate the date of an election by calling or losing a vote of no confidence in itself.

Opposition leader Marc Bean said he is “not a proponent” of fixed term elections, when this newspaper broached the topic yesterday.

“In my opinion, the Premier should reserve the right to call an election when he deems fit.”

Fixed term elections can create lame duck parliaments as the election date approaches, he added.

Even if the Government does manage to pass legislation mandating fixed term parliaments, the next government could simply repeal it — unless the change is done through a constitutional amendment.

The Constitution provides that the term of parliament cannot last longer than five years.

“A new government can reverse any legislation following its election. So it may be that rather than just do the quick and easy (relatively) by way of legislation the OBA Government should consider whether the time is ripe for a constitutional conference,” said former OBA Leader John Barritt who stressed he was speaking in his own capacity.

Mr Barritt said that a number of the other OBA proposals, such as giving people the power to recall their MPs, also point to a constitutional conference.

But Government is unlikely to get the Opposition party’s cooperation if it went down that road.

“The Progressive Labour Party, is not interested in any constitutional conference unless it is to discuss Independence. Anything else is just half stepping and piecemeal,” said Mr Bean.

The UK Government had long held a position that it would not allow any further constitutional changes to Bermuda’s constitution short of Independence.

But Governor George Fergusson indicated, when asked, that the UK position has changed.

“The position of the UK Government is that amendments to the Constitution can be considered in consultation between an OT Government and the UK Government,” according to a Government House statement.

Premier Craig Cannonier signalled last week that the OBA will keep its promise on fixed term parliaments and that the next election will be held five years from now.

The fact that the OBA could be giving up a key strategic advantage should not deter it from doing the right thing, according to Mr Barritt.

“If it's a good idea, and one that you believe in, it shouldn't be abandoned just because it is no longer convenient for you. Good governance isn't about what is good for the government of the day but what you believe best serves the electorate and future generations, regardless of who is government and who is in opposition,” said Mr Barritt.

The fixed term election promise is not the only one that Government will have difficulty enacting as there has never been a stronger Opposition party in the House of Assembly since party politics began in the 1960s.

“It is going to be challenging putting through legislation, even more challenging depending on who is elected the Speaker,” said Mr Barritt.

“But the people have spoken and we all have to live and work with the result. Everyone will now be put to the test, both in terms of attendance and participation.

“The key here is whether there will be created more meaningful opportunities for backbench MPs to influence decision-making through parliamentary committees.

“In my view, this development is long overdue and essential to better governance: it could help encourage more collaboration and critical thinking than we have seen in the past which will also allow for constructive criticism of the Executive (Cabinet) whether Government or Opposition MP.”

Make text smaller Make text larger

Take Our Poll