The Bermuda Legislature is threatening to catch up to 21st century governance. I kid you not.

A Joint Select Committee (JSC) is proposing an independent commission of legislators to manage the operation of both the House on the Hill and the Senate below. Yawn?

The committee doesn’t stop there either. The JSC is also calling for the establishment of an Ethics Committee and the drafting of a comprehensive Code of Conduct to which all members will be expected to adhere. Yawn again? Please don’t. This is important stuff. Seriously.

Such steps could be key components in developing, finally, a more independent Legislature, and ultimately strengthening the oversight that the body is meant to provide: whether it be legislative, financial or holding the executive (Cabinet) to account.

It is a matter of constructing the correct foundation, one that is more in line with modern day practice of parliamentary democracies within the Commonwealth.

Still, you might wonder: how so? Fair question. First, committee members did themselves and their cause a disservice when they decided not to hold any hearings in public.

Public hearings are but one clear and demonstrable way to engage the public you ultimately seek to serve. It helps them to connect the dots too.

Ironically, public meetings are considered not only good, sound practice today but have become pretty standard everywhere else.

Secondly, like a lot of things in politics, the Committee’s recommendations sound good and look good, but will they actually work? Or, more importantly, will members make them work?

Those are fair questions too. Here’s why: there are already a number of important standing committees on the Hill, one or two you may have heard of, like the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

But what about the Committee of the Auditor General? Or the one for the Register of Members’ Interests? Just how are they working out for us?

Well, chances are you may not have even heard of some of them, putting to one side for now what it is each is supposed to do.

Chances are that you do not know because they do not meet regularly and if they do you wouldn’t know it because we never hear of any public meetings.

This is not good when you take into account the purposes for which these committees were created.

I know, I know. I have been banging the drum a lot recently about the need for a more active and robust PAC.

It has to get through some past Progressive Labour Party budgets and financial records first, and that is important too, but please the committee ought to be focusing on current Government expenditure as well.

That’s how and why PAC can be useful and effective.

When it comes to Budgets, I have been around long enough on and of the Hill to know that they are just that, budgets.

They do not put us on the road to recovery unless they are followed and, let’s face it, overspends have a way of showing up later in the form of supplementaries long after the Budget has been put to bed.

The first year under the One Bermuda Alliance Government has proven to be no different. Get cracking PAC.

The Committee on the Office of the Auditor General is supposed to be there to assist the office holder to make sure she has all the tools she needs to get the job done — and done in a timely manner.

A little public scrutiny here could only be a good thing. Ditto for the House Committee on the Register of Members’ Interests.

This body is meant to be monitoring and reporting on any interests or pecuniary benefits members receive which “may be thought to affect his or her conduct or influence his or her actions, speeches or votes”.

In light of recent events, and accusations, you might think their work pretty important.

The Committee is also supposed to keep the register under review generally and to make recommendations for improving its scope and effectiveness.

This stuff is key when it comes to making transparency and accountability a working reality.

I mention all this to make a point. I can’t tell you Mr Editor how many times a week I get stopped by readers who wonder how we can get rid of the Westminster system: this is usually of course when the House is sitting and they’ve been listening to the “debates”.

But hang on for a minute folks, let’s not throw the baby out with the dirty bathwater, just yet.

First, I am not so sure that the model is being worked as properly and as fully as it should be, and secondly there is no reason we cannot modify what we have to make it work better.

The latter option requires time and effort too. A little cross party consensus, like that reflected in this JSC, will also help.

But ultimately it falls to the team with the numbers to actually start to make it happen and that’s the governing party, the one in power and with the power, the OBA.

Calls for collaboration and cooperation which so often follow bitter clashes on and off the Hill take on meaning when real and meaningful opportunities for participation, dialogue and decision are made possible.

Envelop Opposition and Government backbenchers with work or at least the opportunity for work and for greater contribution. That will make for welcome change.

Whatever it takes, it does not take all the king’s horses and all the king’s men to put together a better, more effective system.

Just the will to get ‘er done. Right Humpty?

• Got an opinion? Share it on The Royal Gazette website or write jbarritt@ibl.bm.