WHO ARE MPS TRYING TO FOOL?

We said earlier that the composition of the legislators’ teams was ill- conceived and we want to demonstrate how. The teams should not have been divided according to one’s position but party affiliation – all opposition MPs would have been on the same side. So, as in parliament, MPs would have faced off against their enemies across the aisle. What happens in the house shows that MPs really want to beat up each other – that sentiment is certainly stronger on the side of the opposition.

Thus, in both name ( which means “we are together”) and composition, the MPs’ team was meant to pull wool over our eyes. While it is common knowledge that the Speaker is gravely concerned about the enmity between the two opposing MP sides, what is not is that for as long as he has held that position, he has been trying to broker peace.

Tragically though, the Speaker has limited himself to western strategies and has completely ignored those from his childhood that have been known to work superbly.

Outside urban areas and western culture and immediately after cattle have been let out to pasture, older boys take younger boys who don’t get along well deep into the bush. There the latter engage in intense and physical peace talks to resolve their differences.

The success rate of this conflict resolution strategy is 99 percent. That strategy might actually explain how some MPs came to be best friends with some people in their respective villages. The moral of this story is that MPs should have spent the evening of last week Tuesday using International Boxing Federation and not FIFA rules. We need peace in our parliament.