The GSD, in the form of Isobel Ellul-Hammond, has
raised its concerns that the Liberal Party may be allowed a separate voice in
GBC debates such as on Parliamentary Reform. Her point being that as the
Liberals are in coalition with the GSLP her party would in effect be having to
debate with the government from two angles.
I see her point but it very much depends on how the
debate is constituted. If GBC has asked a Government Minister and the GSD
Shadow to debate an issue such as broadcasting then of course it should be on a
one to one basis. However if the debate is amongst political parties then the
Liberals are as entitled to their say as the GSD or the GSLP.
The fact that the GSLP and the Liberals have been in
coalition in opposition and now government over a long period is neither here
nor there. They are two independent parties, with their own organizations,
leaders and members. They may have found a way over the years to work closely
together but I suspect if you discussed politics with a member of the Liberal
Party and a member of the GSLP, although they would have a joint centre left
approach, they equally would have a very different take on any given issue.
Both parties are also very distinctive in the GSLP
being a sister party of Labour whilst the Liberals are closely linked to both
Liberal International and the Lib Dems.
If we take the UK as an example if there is a TV or
radio debate on a key political issue it is not unusual to see a Conservative
MP pitted against a Lib Dem MP with a Labour MP thrown in. The difference comes
when the subject for debate is one of government and there the Minister will
take part, who may be Conservative or Lib Dem, with a Labour Opposition spokesperson
giving their party’s view.
So Isobel Ellul-Hammond would be right if GBC was
creating a debate on a government issue. Then obviously only the minister
should be involved, regardless of his or her party, and likewise the opposition
spokesperson would speak for the GSD. However if the debate is between parties
then our Liberals have as much right to be heard as the GSLP or GSD.
Indeed if it is a party debate then the PDP should
also be included. They have earned the right to be heard for in two general
elections they have fielded a full slate of candidates. The fact that none of them
were elected is neither here nor there. People still voted for them.
If the PDP was included and as it sprang from the GSD
then the two parties’ views on an issue could well be in alignment. So would it
be fair for the GSLP and Liberals only to have one voice when those of the PDP
and GSD were ranged against it in a party debate? I would say not.
These issues are far more complex than a sound bite
but I can’t blame Isobel Ellul-Hammond for trying. Being a believer in
democracy over all else I would defend any party’s right to be heard: that goes
for the GSLP and the GSD; it certainly goes for the Liberals and yes the PDP
too. The PDP may not have any MPs but they did win votes and the people who
voted PDP have the right for their party’s views to be aired alongside those of
the other elected parties in public debate.
