It is somewhat disappointing that Members of the House of Assembly have been deprived, at least for now, of the opportunity to debate the merits of joining the Caribbean Community.

It is also disappointing, but not surprising, that Government wishes to examine the pros and cons of joining Caricom through a discussion paper followed by a debate, as opposed to utilising a joint select committee.

And it is disappointing that Speaker of the House of Assembly, Stanley Lowe, decided to check the rules of the House of Assembly when it would inconvenience the Government, but not, it would seem, when he might have ruled in the Opposition's favour.

Mr. Lowe ruled two Fridays ago that the United Bermuda Party's motion to establish a joint select committee to examine Caricom could not be debated.

Last Friday he explained that the motion was unacceptable because the discussion paper route had already been accepted in the Throne Speech debate.

Opposition House Leader Maxwell Burgess has noted that his motion was tabled before the House of Assembly debated the Throne Speech; Mr. Lowe could have ruled that the House could not debate the Throne Speech until his motion was dealt with.

Mr. Lowe, evidently, does not agree. Now Mr. Burgess will have to table a motion to rescind the Throne Speech and to then debate the joint select committee.

That of course, is unlikely to happen. Government will hardly throw out the entire Throne Speech to allow debate on one section.

But it begs the broader question of whether debates on issues will be permitted if legislation has been promised on the same issue in The Throne Speech.

Given the glacial pace at which legislation and discussion papers move under any government, it would be too easy to promise bills on this subject and Green Papers on that as a method of stifling debate.

To some extent, the discussion is moot. Government will vote down the joint select committee motion, if it ever reaches the House, and would have done so before the Throne Speech.

That too is a shame. A joint select committee on this subject would not be a bad thing.

It should not be assumed that the Opposition is utterly opposed to the idea any more than it should be assumed the Government is for it.

There are opportunities for bipartisanship in Parliament and this is one.

Sadly, the Government's record since 1998 on issues such as this has been to avoid bipartisanship and consultation unless it is dragged kicking and screaming to the table. That may be good politics, but it is not necessarily good government.