Parliamentary restrictions outdated
ATTENDING A parliamentary sitting at Gordon House is always such a stressful experience. You have to worry about all sorts of things, like whether you will be allowed inside in your dashiki, grandad collar shirt, or a regular buttonup shirt without a tie.
A couple weeks ago, I decided to make the trek downtown Kingston to attend one of the sittings to observe the debates, which I was reliably informed would include presentations on the motion relating to repeal of the abortion law that was brought by Member of Parliament, Juliet Cuthbert-Flynn.
I was rather excited to hear the views of parliamentarians on this topic and whatever else was on the agenda for the day. When I got there, Prime Minister Andrew Holness was presenting a motion to extend the state of emergency. The data he was presenting to support the motion piqued my interest greatly so I grabbed my notebook, which I almost always have (except at a social event), to take some notes.
By the time I got to writing the first line in my book a man came over to ask if I am a journalist. I found the question rather odd but thought maybe he wanted to be kind and provide me with printed materials or something. How presumptuous of me! I told him no but mentioned I write a weekly column for this paper. I learnt then that I am not allowed to take notes of the proceedings in the Parliament unless I am in the designated area for journalists. About five or so minutes before, I committed another offence – I took a picture of the sitting, which I am apparently not allowed to do either. I became frustrated and wanted to leave.
VERY DISCOURAGING
I find the rules and regulations rather preposterous and very discouraging. How am I as a citizen to engage the Parliament and hold legislators accountable if I cannot do something as simple as take notes of the proceedings so I can refer to the information at the appropriate time? Interestingly, I was allowed to be on my phone without any restriction. I could have recorded the proceedings electronically, took notes on my phone or tweet the proceedings. I have now forgotten the profound contributions made by Fitz Jackson, Angela Brown Burke and Peter Bunting, and everything PM Holness said.
Needless to say, I tweeted my frustration as any millennial would. Human rights advocate Susan Goffe responded, saying she too has “encountered prohibitions against/questions about members of the public taking notes. Parliament, courts, a commission of enquiry ... It has always struck me as bizarre. Allowed to be present, but not to take notes?”
In 2002, the Standing Orders Committee deliberated the issue after Jamaicans for Justice, Transparency International (JA) and the Farquharson Institute raised concerns about the prohibition. The committee’s recommendation was discussed in Parliament on June 11, 2002, and it was agreed that visitors be allowed to take notes “provided there is no disturbance to the proceedings” (See https://goo. gl/vemFfz).
The rule needs to change (again). It is ridiculous. As Susan said in a blog a year ago, “It is hard to see any logical reason for it ... the media are allowed to take notes. The Public Broadcasting Corporation of Jamaica (PBCJ) broadcasts the proceedings live, including streaming on the Internet.”
We can’t expect citizens to truly play their part, to be democratically responsible, if there are so many restrictions, which do not even make sense, in such an important space as the Parliament.