February 12, 2002

Dear Sir,

The public's message to the Boundaries Commission is that it is confused and demands to be informed before being asked to give an opinion. The public wants to know the pros and cons before passing judgment.

This is not just a question of whether there should be 20, 30 or 40 representatives in Parliament. It goes much, much deeper than that. It is the system itself that is flawed.

In Bermuda, we have been brainwashed into believing that the "Westminster System" of government is the best form of government. It certainly is not. Under this system, there are two main parties which are always confrontational, always vying for power, and the winning party in an election becomes all-powerful for up to five long years.

The leader of that winning party becomes a virtual dictator for five years. There are no proper checks and balances, there is no proper veto system and no elected second legislative body to put brakes on unpopular government decrees. For example, our "Westminster" style of government can borrow itself into oblivion and there's nothing the man in the street can do about it, although it is he who will ultimately pay the price of higher inflation, higher taxes, higher unemployment, higher crime, and lower growth.

Even in Britain, the Conservative party has at last got something right: After hundreds of years of being blind and deaf, it wants the farcical "inherited/appointed" members in the House of Lords to become an elected 300-member senate (London Evening Standard, January 15, 2002).

In today's Royal Gazette, you quote Lord Waddington as saying "It's possible that the Bermudian Government might request independence without the authority of a referendum". The people of Bermuda should be consulted by referendum on other important issues, too. Like the imposition of income tax, like joining Caricom, like overborrowing and overspending public money and like the imposition or gerrymandering of the boundaries for electoral gain by parties.

The whole point to all this is that Bermuda's constitution is seriously flawed and undemocratic. The Government-in-power shoves unpopular policies down our throats without our participation. The people need an emergency brake. It's called a people's veto and has been used from time to time in Switzerland to great effect.

It works this way: If the people don't like government policy they can gather about five percent of the voters' signatures (about 1,800 signatures in Bermuda) and present a petition forcing government to hold a referendum on the subject. Cumbersome though this may appear to be, it is most effective in stopping an arrogant government from shoving unpopular policy down our collective throats. If the government knows that this people's veto can be used, it will not take the risk of plunging ahead with any unpopular policy (properly held polls can give arrogant governments a clue as to whether its policy is popular or not).

Mr. editor, thank you for allowing me to express my opinion over the latest bungled efforts by the "Boundaries Commission". It would be nice if the Boundaries Commission presented the "pros and cons" arguments to the people before trampling onwards to a decision. It would be nice, for a change, to be informed before being asked to vote on a subject.

MICHAEL G. MARSH

Smith's Parish