Public can help pass new laws

THE EDITOR: Calypsonians, composers, writers, designers, entertainers and others worked steadfastly with the Ministry of Legal Affairs to provide Copyright Laws for TT. It was a great achievement even though later amendments proposed by Copyright Association of Trinidad and Tobago (COTT) to close up some loopholes were not taken to Parliament. That effort points the way to greater possibilities. Firstly, it can be the normal or frequent method for drafting and amending laws and regulations. The benefit of all that expertise among stakeholders must be enormous as it was with the Copyright Laws.

Secondly, provision can be made for individuals, organisations and whatever groups to propose legislation to relevant bi-partisan Committees of Parliament. They should be allowed to argue their case for whatever laws or amendments they propose. They know the obstacles, needs and experiences of daily living. The Committees will debate these proposals in public sessions at which the public, (individuals, organisations, groups), members of Parliament or anybody else may speak for or against. The findings of the Committee will go to the House. These will be specially important House Committees. This proposal is logical. Clearly, with all it has to do, Government cannot/has not been able to pass all the laws we need. We need laws about land use — agriculture vs houses; compensation for victims of crime and accidents; more time for local programmes on the electronic media (huge congratulations to Gayelle producers for their station of local programmes!); financing of political parties; zebra crossings; National Trust, etc. Many individuals and groups have things they would like to see in the Statue Books — and they have been saying so for years, in vain.

In addition, what I have proposed is well established in some other countries. USA is one such. I am not a great fan of that country but there are many things we can learn from USA. One of them, in the best tradition of respect for the people, is the right of citizens to propose and debate laws under which they will live and function. Without Constitutional Reform it is possible to try out this proposal. The public will be invited to propose laws, bi-partisan House Committees of each House will debate the proposals in public sessions, their findings will be referred to the Ministry of Legal Affairs or whatever Ministry is responsible and the current procedure will then flow in: the Bill will be taken to Parliament, passed perhaps, then proclaimed. Government will also continue its current procedure of law-making. Constitutional Reform can later adopt the new procedure if it is considered satisfactory or appropriate. Better and better government has to be our goal. We need it!

VAN STEWART
Diego Martin