"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,

But in ourselves, that we are underlings"

William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar

It was as much of a surprise to me, Mr. Editor, as it was to you and your readers I suppose, as to why we didn't take up the Boundaries Commission Report last Friday on the Hill. First off, the motion to adopt the Commission's recommendations is in the Premier's name and whether it will be debated and when is entirely a matter for the Premier and her Government. There isn't anything we in the Opposition can do about it, except complain, if we want to, and to be prepared. We were. There were only two other eligible and non-contentious items on the Order Paper – extending the Census and delaying certain provisions of PACE – and it very much looked like they were not going to take a great deal of our time on the Hill. They didn't. We could have started debate on the Boundaries Report half an hour after we returned from lunch which was a reasonable hour to begin a major debate.

Mind you, our day would not have been that long either were it not for Ministerial Statements, Question Period and customary congrats and obits; and speaking of parliamentary questions, a nod this week to the voter who queried whether we ought to consider a special Question Period for the Premier, much like the Prime Minister's Question Period over in the UK. We just moved here to questions of all Ministers without notice (providing they arise out of a Ministerial Statement or out of a matter of "urgent public importance"), but parliamentary reform is clearly in the air. My colleague Dr Grant Gibbons felt compelled to make the point on the motion to adjourn that the time had come to not only have a dedicated Legislature website but to take advantage of CITV and start to televise proceedings as well, presumably to raise the bar on debates yet again.

But back to the Boundaries Commission Report which the Premier elected to carry over. To this week? We'll see. As it turns out, it is now only one of two items eligible to be taken up today, that is if the new PLP administration follows convention and practice and waits the usual two weeks between introduction and debate; the other piece of legislation is the Children Amendment Act which purports to be repair work to the original Act to provide for more effective regulation of day care centres and home care providers.

Funny this though: the time it takes for legislation to get to the House. We have just come off a three-month recess and still it trickles uphill. So far, it's looking very much like the more things change, the more they actually just stay the same. There were only two other items tabled last week – changes to the Base Lands Development Act to give Government the power to lease former base lands for up to 262 years, up from the current maximum of 131 years; and an amendment to the Statistics Act which will give the Minister the power to extend the dates for census taking but without the necessity of parliamentary scrutiny and approval – which is currently what is required and which was the case last week when Government had to explain what had gone wrong and why the 2010 census had not yet been completed. That's one way of easing the legislative load and to cut back on transparency and accountability. But that's not our only problem. The other problem is getting Government to manage more effectively what we do get so that we don't find ourselves scrambling at the end of each session, cramming important legislation into long days and nights.

The Boundaries Commission Report has been out for months. This unexpected deferral (it was the second: there was a motion under former Premier Brown which never got taken up when the House went down for the summer) got the politically paranoid thinking (always dangerous) and tongues wagging. Their first thought: "They're going to call an election. The PLP wants to fight the next one under current boundaries rather than under the proposed changes; and don't forget the PLP submission to the Commission which was that there wasn't any need for any change."

Sure, the PLP are only three years into their current term and Premier Paula Cox has yet to make her mark as leader. But there are those who believe the next election is just around the corner, regardless of whether the boundary changes are adopted or not. Here's a short list of their reasons why:

¦ Premier Cox enjoys the bounce that typically follows the election of a new leader and appointment of a new Cabinet.

¦ The portfolio shuffle helps give the impression that change and improvement is on the way (no matter if you figure out who's responsible for what).

¦ There are promises of changes, almost daily, from Ministers who seem to be taking full advantage of the press available to them, and words of course don't cost a penny, now.

¦ Debt? What debt? The latest Fitch ratings will be used to ease any alarm about the economy, notwithstanding any caution that may have accompanied their pronouncement. Besides what's a billion-dollar debt but a big number until it actually affects voters where it hurts?

¦ Why wait until things really do get worse around here and the promises have to be funded (or not) when the Budget comes around in February? The signs are not encouraging: continuing slump in retail sales; fewer jobs; declining work permits; struggling hotels; a steadily increasing rate of inflation; and, I suspect, falling Government revenues.

¦ Finally, there is the continuing gift of a divided Opposition, two parties which look set to engage in a knock-down, dragged-out fight for first-runner up in a battle where winning is all that counts.

Face it, Mr. Editor, it may not get much better than this; if you are a Government seeking re-election, that is.

Next week, the other view.

Your views? Write jbarritt@ibl.bm