SWEETNESS and light, it was, mostly, for a change, Mr. Editor, last Friday in the House on the Hill — which was surreal, almost, in light of events unfolding outside. As it was, all of the matters taken up — three — met with broad agreement, and we ended up out of there at a fairly decent hour, around seven o’clock or so.

The one item which brought members together, for the longest period of time, most of the afternoon in fact, was akin to motherhood and apple pie. Community & Cultural Affairs Minister Wayne Perinchief had asked the House to take note of “Recommendations for a National Policy on Disabilities”, an October 2006 Report which had been produced by a Government-appointed Committee for a National Policy on Disabilities. The Committee had been set up in January 2005.

The Report — copies of which Members had had since mid-May when the motion was first tabled — set out a framework and foundation for the design and implementation of a National Disabilities and Accessibility Plan, the purposes of which would be to evaluate public policies and programmes, including legislation, and specifically the Human Rights Act, to ensure in Bermuda the inclusion of people with disabilities.

What was to argue against? Or about? Or with? See here, Mr. Editor: the Westminster system does not always produce argument and divisiveness where there isn’t any — or where there shouldn’t be any.

According to Census 2000, the Minister told us (actually he read to us from a prepared 15-page brief, which he shared with us as he read: thank you, Minister) that there were about 3,000 people reporting a disabling health condition in Bermuda.

He also informed us that approximately three to four people for every 1,000 people have severe learning disabilities, and that in Bermuda 11 per cent of our adult population are limited in their day-to-day activities because of physical, mental or emotional problems.

The elephant in the room, which most wanted to tip toe around, was the issue of cost and who will pay. As Grant Gibbons, current shadow spokesman for Education and former Finance Minister, pointed out, mainstreaming in the schools, for example, has to date been an expensive and a challenging proposition.

Dale Butler, former teacher and school principal, and now Minister of Social Rehabilitation, also acknowledged some of the challenges we face in education.

For now, Government is proposing to establish an Accessibility Advisory Council, whose job it will be to wrestle with these issues, and to develop a Policy of Inclusion for All.

The consensus and mood of the House on the Hill: get on with it.

That support came from both sides prompted PLP MP and Government Whip Ottiwell Simmons to declare that he had found the debate “comforting”.

“You enjoyed it then did you?” inquired the Speaker.

“Yes, immensely,” replied Mr. Simmons. “It’s been good to see members coming together. There are no disabilities here. We are all one”.

Mr. Simmons was the last to speak. No one, apparently, wanted to argue his point.

Wisely, I also think.Not so cool whipsBUT leave it to a Whip to have the last word, Mr. Editor — and those last words particularly. Our job is to make sure our members are present for a vote; and, of course, vote the party line. But on a take note motion there is no vote. In such circumstances, Whips can relax — a bit. But only a bit, mind you, because we still need 14 in the Chambers or close by to make up a quorum and on top of that you never know when a debate might collapse and a snap vote be called.

These are reasons why Whips are not so popular with colleagues who want to be, er, elsewhere, especially when we are only just taking note.

Spare a thought then for those who are asked to crack their party’s whip, and, in this regard, some of the better thoughts I have come across recently are those of UK MP Paul Flynn, a backbencher of quick wit and sharp tongue of Labour fame (just ask outgoing PM Tony Blair) who penned a rather clever k, Commons Knowledge: How To Be A Backbencher<$>.

This is what he wrote about dreaded Whips:

“Whips live a half life of exclusion and silence.

“It is only tolerable as a period of penance for past sins or to earn a hoist up the greasy pole. The job has been compared with the school prefects. It is closer to that of school sneaks.

“Now judged to be an essential apprenticeship for future ministerial roles, many suffer for a short while and are promoted. Others languish in years of eternal hope. Some are ignominiously found wanting and are dropped from the first rung of the ladder.

“The Whips are excluded from many of the activities of backbenchers. Meanwhile, constituencies are irritated when their mouthpiece is muffled and becomes a shadowy figure in the Commons.

“The satisfaction of the long-term Whips is that of the toilers in the boiler rooms. Unseen, grubby, unloved, they keep the ships of Government and Opposition steaming steadily forward.”

If only.

PS: I expect it did not escape your notice that Mr. Simmons announced his retirement from politics some weeks ago. He will not be running in the next election.Water, pleaseNO votes were required either, Mr. Editor, on two small pieces of legislation which were also taken up last Friday on the Hill. The first featured amendments to bring about what we are promised will be “accelerated clearance of crew and passengers entering or leaving Bermuda”. Airlines will now have to provide immigration authorities with the names and all sorts of other details — sex, date of birth, nationality and passport — within minutes of taking off, electronically.

It is hoped (we were told) that this will help trim waiting lines at the airport (although quite how was never really explained) as well as an end to departure cards. Well, here’s hoping . . . the practice matches the theory.

The second was a bit of housekeeping, the legislative amendments necessary to bring about the establishment of a national fire services to henceforth be known as the Bermuda Fire and Rescue Service.

It, too, had the support of the Opposition. Debate was thus short — although it had its moments.

Dr. Gibbons emphasised the need for a first-class fire and rescue service at the airport — most especially in light of the problems with Longbird Bridge. He also pointed out that foam and not water was essential in fighting fires generated by jet fuel. Foam helps deprive the fire of oxygen. Water only helps it along.

“Please,” came the cry from our benches, “don’t be giving Mr. Fox any ideas.”

Mr. A.V. Fox is the Sergeant At Arms in the House on the Hill. He has a very kind habit of providing members with glasses of water when they are on their feet, talking for any length of time.Much anticipationHERE are a couple of updates to a couple of thoughts I had last week, Mr. Editor. You will recall how I pointed out the various ways in which debate in the House on the Hill can be stifled: in Bermuda we appeared to have graduated from referral to committee to court proceedings and to criminal investigation, all of which can effectively prevent debate on the Hill on important issues of the day. I overlooked one other — which surfaced last Friday in the House. Dr. Gibbons wanted to talk about education on the motion to adjourn. The Minister, Randy Horton, had that morning read a Ministerial Statement in which he had expressed his disappointment with teachers and their union who had taken industrial action over their contract negotiations with Government at a time when he felt it should be all hands on deck in light of the findings of the recently released Hopkins Education Review.

[Incidentally, Minister Horton tried once again to explain, and again not so convincingly, why the Government team even made an offer — which was accepted — that was still subject to approval by the Ministry of Finance. It used to be that everyone went into contract talks knowing their bottom lines i.e., how far they could or could not go. No wonder teachers were upset.]

Dr. Gibbons wanted to talk about education, too. But the Speaker stopped him in his tracks shortly after he began.

There is this rule against anticipation. It reads:

8220;It shall be out of order to anticipate an Order of the Day by a discussion on a motion or amendment dealing with the subject matter if a Bill or other Order of the Day prior to the consideration of that Order.”<$>

There are three Education motions on the Order Paper: the first on the report on mould, at CedarBridge; the second, on the Education Review Report; and the third on the proposal for a Joint Select Committee to review and report on the recommendations of the Review Report.

They pretty well cover the waterfront on education — and so it was that the Speaker ruled that the three motions pretty well stopped Dr. Gibbons from venturing too far into education and educational reform.

On the other hand, however, it may be that the Progressive Labour Party Government will shortly have to take up one or two or all three education motions.

No new legislation was tabled on Friday and consequently they only have three pieces on the agenda: A Motor Car Amendment Act and amendments to the Parliamentary Election Act to allow for the use of photographs on the ballots.

What’s that, Mr. Editor: you still think early election?