Independents – a mind of their own

THE EDITOR: The Independent bench of Parliament, as I see it, is meant to be just that. Independent.

A commentator recently made the astonishing assertion that one Independent senator broke ranks on the recent procurement legislation vote. Ranks? By definition the Independents are called upon to make their decisions based on the exercise of their individual consciences. They are never to act as some kind of cabal that moves as a unified political force with its own agenda.

In a past incarnation Independents had a leader, held meetings among themselves and agreed to have political groups appear before them in advance of key parliamentary votes in order to lobby them for their support. Amazing.

An Independent is supposed to be his/her own leader. Anything that pressures him/her to abandon his/her independence and cave in to pressure from another leader, from group-think, or from outside intimidation should be fiercely resisted.

Certainly, an Independent listens to other views, especially during parliamentary debates. However, he or she makes up his or her own mind.

The recently advanced procurement legislation appeared to have garnered great interest from several quarters before its being brought to the Parliament. There are several reasons for this.

First of all, the State's oodles and oodles of money is at stake. All the chambers of commerce know this. Restricted government-to-government contracts mean access to potentially more of the pie for them.

Second, of course, there are those who really believe that all politicians just can't wait to get their hands on public money, and anything the Government proposes to do has this as its ulterior motive.

Third is the Opposition's usual approach. Anything that will cause the Government trouble is to be desired and pursued at all costs.

Finally, the Government is aware that anything that can be regulated will be challenged in court, and stands to be delayed and derailed. Thus, it resists it.

It is unfortunate that several people took the position that there was only one correct treatment for the procurement legislation. Vote it down. It reminded one of the reaction to the general election results. A kind of arrogance that said only one party had a right to win and if it didn't, the other and its supporters had to be excoriated.

Before the procurement legislation was voted on in Parliament, one Independent senator said he was never more lobbied than on this particular issue. The Law Association, not perceived to be the most unbiased of organisations, demanded to have its position heard. A respected daily newspaper even plastered pictures and names of each individual Independent on its front page, questioning which one would vote with the Government.

Into this milieu our Independents were thrown. They could not be expected to simply parrot the voices of those shouting the loudest, many driven by self-interest. They were called upon to listen to reasoned debate, especially in the Parliament. They were required to make themselves aware as much as possible by keeping an open mind as they listened. And, armed with this knowledge, they were then asked to bring their individual and independent thought processes to bear upon the matter at hand before they made their decisions based on the exercise of their own consciences.

Who's to say that the coward on Facebook has a better insight into this legislation than the Independents who diligently and dutifully participated in the entire parliamentary process? Who's to say that one Independent senator's independent decision is right and another has no right to his or her own independent decision?

JOANNE K JOSEPH

San Fernando