The Tribune

IN 2018, then-Opposition Leader Philip Davis strongly criticized the nasty attacks and stupidity of then-Speaker of the House of Assembly, Halston Moultrie, who repeatedly proved his unfitness for that high office. Davis rightly labelled the bumptious and narcissistic Moultrie as a “bullying buffoon.”

As an incoming prime minister, Mr. Davis had the opportunity in 2021 to ensure the selection of a competent, highly-regarded Speaker, fluent in English, parliamentary procedure, decorum, and common sense.

Speaker Patricia Deveaux proved spectacularly incapable on all fronts.

In 2022, she launched an inexcusable attack on NEMA Director, Captain Stephen Russell, from the chair. Sadly, instead of a display of humility and an acknowledgment of error, Speaker Deveaux doubled down in a crude and obnoxious display of arrogance and defensiveness. During her first term as Speaker, she proved to be another bullying buffoon. The Chair of the House of Assembly is not a personal perch from which the Speaker should sound off on public issues, as she sometimes does.

The Rules clearly state that the Speaker must not participate in debates. The reason for that should be obvious: to maintain impartiality and the appearance of impartiality.

This year, Mr. Davis had the opportunity to chose a better speaker. Because of his failure to do so the current Speaker—like Mr. Moultrie—will continue to embarrass herself, the House, the governing party, and the country.

Her chest-beating statement that she has a legal team to back her up suggests just how out of her depth and incapable she is in her in her role. In an editorial last week, The Nassau Guardian observed:

“When the government was faced with questions arising from a criminal complaint filed in the United States against Jonathan Eric Gardiner, [Foreign Minister Fred] Mitchell chose not to confront the issue head-on in the House of Assembly this week, but to instead rise up as the Progressive Liberal Party’s (PLP) chief damage control officer.

“He has spent recent days dismissing the indictment, while feigning unfamiliarity with a document that has dominated public discussion for weeks, and seeking to silence members of Parliament attempting to raise a matter of undeniable national importance during a budget debate.”

Taking her cue from Mr. Mitchell, the Speaker was, the journal noted, “remarkably wrongheaded in her attempt to dismiss the allegations by claiming she could have the House sergeant-at-arms escort a member of the opposition to a police station to report on the matter. We suspect she was emboldened by the stance Mitchell has taken. She was mistaken.”

The Speaker appears not to have a mind of her own. Instead, she seems guided by whatever posture and line of attack is taken by PLP members, even if they are wrong.

A group of owls is known as a “parliament”.  Mrs. Deveaux is more peacock than owl.  But she is a surprisingly obsequious owl, who should remember that she is not the PLP speaker, but the speaker for all members. By continually trying to prove herself to her “side”, she looks like a puppet.

Halston Moultrie, for all his idiocy, was not afraid to challenge the FNM, even when he appeared ridiculous. Mrs. Deveaux has the opposite problem.

Will she ever be prepared to rule against the government? Does she have the courage and independence to protect the minority, and the conventions, rules, and standards of the House? Watching the debates, it sometimes seems that some of the House clerks may be uncomfortable with her tone, posture, and judgement.

Ironically, had the government and the Speaker allowed the Opposition to speak about various allegations and to table various documents, they may have taken the air out of the some of the Opposition’s assault. Instead, the brouhaha in the House, and the Speaker’s bellicosity, dominated the headlines, social media posts, and national discussion for days, often obscuring the government budgetary priorities and public relations.

The crude attempt to shut down the Opposition backfired, fuelling their complaints and making the Davis Administration look like it has something to hide.

When the prime minister sought to refer remarks to the Committee of Privilege, made by East Grand Bahama MP, Kwasi Thompson, relative to Minister of Finance Michael Halkitis and his relationship to Top Notch Builders, a company also tied to Gardiner, the Speaker readily agreed.

This was another demonstration of bias.  The information to which Mr. Thompson referred is already in the public domain. Neither he nor his opposition colleagues were engaging in “frivolous gossip”.

There was also a clash over whether matters left unfinished before Parliament was dissolved ahead of the general election could be brought back before the Public Accounts Committee. When the Opposition stated they may take the matter to the courts, she was belligerent in her response.

The clashes between the Speaker and Opposition Leader, Michael Pintard, Kwasi Thompson, and Long Island MP, Andre Rollins, have dissolved into shouting matches.

It calls to my mind a proverbial warning to teachers: “When you have to shout down your students, you have already lost the room.”

Clearly deeply insecure in her speakership, she continues to lose the chamber.

Over the years, Bahamian Speakers have distinguished themselves by their knowledge of the Rules and the spirit of the Rules, and by their own stately and dignified conduct in the Chair. Unfortunately, Speaker Deveaux seems intent on applying a sledgehammer to the foundations of stateliness and dignity – not to mention the Rules – of the House of Assembly.

She seems intent on continuing with the degradation started by Speaker Moultrie. In some ways she is making Moultrie look like an Oxford don and an expert in Erskine May’s Parliamentary Practice.

British constitutional authority Walter Bagehot pointed out that to maintain the respect of the people, parliament must be functional, as well as stately and dignified.

Every member is responsible for maintaining the stateliness and dignity of the House of Assembly, but responsibility for this rests mostly on the shoulders of the person who occupies the Chair: the Speaker. If stateliness and dignity collapse, respect will also decline.

It is the Speaker who most represents the House to the other institutions of government and to the public.

It is the Speaker who is most responsible for the orderly and dignified conduct of a chamber that, by its very nature, can generate considerable passion.

When one continues to place incapable people in positions that further erode standards, it often comes back to bite you in the derrière. It’s a lesson many thought Mr. Davis would have learned after his first term.

The Speaker may continue to be a useful tool for the government. Yet, because of her manner and behavior, she is a political problem and distraction.

When Woodes Rogers was Royal Governor, a royal mandate was carried out to establish the House of Assembly in 1729. Nearly 300 years later it remains a cornerstone of our parliamentary democracy. It’s the Speaker’s role to protect this primary national institution, not to collude in lowering its standards.

The country deserves better than Mrs. Deveaux as Speaker.