Government should listen to the people. That’s what we’ve been hearing from protesters in the grounds of the House of Assembly this week and they are, of course, right. That is the whole purpose of our democratic system: that the electorate can install a government that exercises the majority will. It’s not perfect, it’s frequently messy but, as Winston Churchill famously commented, “it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried”.

The obvious question, then, when trying to make sense of the demonstrations in Hamilton, is: what is the will of the people? One may be led to believe by the hundreds of determined folks making their displeasure clear in a very public and vocal manner that most Bermudians oppose the Pathways to Status Bill. In fact, the opposite is true.

As illustrated by the scientific poll conducted by Bermudian market research firm Global Research and published in this newspaper yesterday, voters who support Pathways outnumber those who oppose it by nearly two to one. The gap exceeds the poll’s margin of error by multiples. It’s not even close.

One of the many ironies surrounding the immigration reform protest is, while its leaders like to refer to themselves and their supporters as “the people”, they are very much in the minority on the Pathways issue.

So if the Bermuda Government is truly listening to the people, it should pass this Bill without further ado. That MPs were prevented from even debating the Bill on Monday’s scheduled date by protesters blocking the entrance to Sessions House is of potentially greater significance for Bermuda than the Bill itself.

The stability of our political system has become something for Bermuda to boast about, a factor that helps this island to punch well above its weight on the world stage. We have the oldest national legislature in the western hemisphere, dating back to 1620. Through many growing pains and successful battles to win civil rights, it has evolved into the democracy we have today. It is a system set up for resolving inevitable disagreements over what is best for the country between groups with differing opinions.

It provides for a civilised way of conducting “the people’s business”, although sometimes the language we hear in the House of Assembly is less than civilised, and opportunities for the electorate to vote for those they believe will best represent their views. On Monday, this system was compromised as the wheels of government were brought to a grinding halt by those who blocked elected lawmakers from entering the House.

The Bermuda Constitution protects the right to assemble, as Chris Furbert, the president of the Bermuda Industrial Union, correctly pointed out on Tuesday. However, forceful and wilful interference with “the free exercise by either House or the Legislature of its authority” is illegal under the Parliament Act.

This is where the line should be drawn. Free speech is a cherished right in our democracy, and rightly so. However, it is not a right to prevent others from exercising their rights. And it is blatantly illegal to stop MPs from meeting in the House by force. A precedent must not be set here. Allowing any group to stop lawmakers from debating legislation they do not like is unacceptable. If people can flout this law with impunity, it will only encourage similar actions in the future. What happens if a group decides it does not like the result of a general election, for example?

It is difficult for the protesters to claim any parallel with civil rights protests of the past, given that the proposed legislation is, by its nature, anti-discriminatory. It takes no right away from any person; it simply provides the opportunity for extra rights for people who have lived among us for decades, in line with what the vast majority of countries do already.

Indeed, if anyone’s rights have been infringed in the past few days, it has been those of the taxpayer. In exchange for paying taxes, we expect basic government services, such as public transport and trash collection, to function. Given that Chief Justice Ian Kawaley has ruled that this industrial action is “probably breaking the law”, will the taxpayer get any recompense for the inconvenience caused by those who have incited workers to down tools?

Sadly, it is far more likely that the taxpayer will be hit with an overtime bill for dealing with the backlog of work created by the walkout.

However, perhaps Dr Justice Kawaley’s ruling may open the door for legal action against the protest leaders by people and businesses whose livelihoods have been seriously affected. If nothing else, such a scenario would remind the protest group that rights come with responsibilities. One final irony to note has been evident to anyone travelling down Dundonald Street this week. Amid the impassioned pleas to down tools, work has been continuing unabated on the overhaul of the Bermuda Industrial Union gas station.

Make of that what you will.