Report explores role of The Speaker, appointment, ongoing independence | Loop Cayman Islands

The Constitutional Commission of the Cayman Islands promotes public understanding and awareness of the constitution and its values. It also publishes reports, papers and other documents on any constitutional matters affecting the Cayman Islands. One of these reports, entitled “Explanatory Notes on The Speaker of the Parliament of the Cayman Islands,” was published in October 2021. One of the main highlights of the Notes was the importance of maintaining the independence and impartiality of the Speaker pre and post elections, including whether the Speaker should strictly be appointed from outside Parliament to allow the post holder to maintain his or her ongoing independence.

Expectations and practicality of independence

When it comes to impartiality and independence, the Notes state:

As the independent arbiter of the Parliament, the Speaker is therefore expected to act impartially in the exercise of various important functions that are central to the effective operation of a parliamentary democracy, including: (i) the maintenance of decorum in debates; (ii) the calling of Members to speak; (iii) the giving of rulings on points of order and allegations of breaches of privilege; (iv) the naming and suspending of members for misconduct; (v) appointing Members to committees; (vi) accepting or refusing motions on the Order Paper; (vii) regulating questions in the House; and (viii) generally acting as servant of the Parliament or its spokesperson.

Theoretically, any of these functions could be threatened if the Speaker loses his or her independence or if the Speaker develops an actual or perceived conflict of interest in relation to a matter to be laid before the Parliament. The practicality of achieving such independence and avoiding all conflicts is, however, another story. The reasons for this are as follows:

The person who normally occupies the seat of the Speaker in Parliament is an elected member of Parliament who ran for office. This means that the Speaker, if appointed from elected members, will have his or her own political views on motions coming before him or her. Therefore, a question can arise as to the reason why the relevant Speaker accepts or refuses a particular motion. There is a small pool of persons offering themselves for high office, either for elections or for the position of the Speaker. Therefore, elected members are likely to consider casting their ballot for someone that they knew well i.e., based on an existing relationship.Post-elections, all elected members, including the proposed Speaker, are involved in the formation of government and identifying candidates for Premier from among all elected members. If the Speaker is actually chosen from elected members, the question then becomes whether he or she has continued, indirect, involvement in any decision-making post-election i.e., behind closed doors.

Recommendations

Bearing in mind these potential risks to independence of the role of the Speaker, the Notes of the Constitutional Commission asks whether, on balance, it would be preferable to only be able to select a Speaker from outside of the members of Parliament and whether, if possible, it would be desirable to detach the election of the Speaker from the post-election negotiations, the appointment of the Premier and the formation of the government.

While the appointment of the Speaker solely from outside Parliament would be ideal, it would be a challenge to completely avoid conflicts of interest with the final Speaker appointment given the very small population and close ties between the people. For example, let’s say that the constitution was amended to state that the Speaker shall only be a person outside Parliament, it is likely that elected members will still consider someone that they had a past work or business or personal relationship with, thereby giving rise to the concern for perceived or actual conflicts of interest.

Detaching the election of the Speaker from the post-election negotiations would also be ideal. However, the reality is that “secret” negotiations will always take place within any political landscape whether we have independents or political parties.

If voters truly want full independence in the process of appointment of the Speaker and complete detachment from post-election negotiations for the post of Premier and formation of government, voters should consider having a referendum to amend the constitution and Elections Act to allow voters to vote for their choice of Speaker from a pool of qualified candidates who are not elected members of Parliament. The same concept might also apply to the selection of the Premier.

Related Articles

Cayman News

Cayman News

Cayman News

Cayman News

Cayman News

Cayman News