The Editor, Sir:

The deliberations in Parliament on the amendments to the sexual offences bill is proving to be more of a 'bedroom police' bill than one that protects members of the society from predators. Our preoccupation with stopping consensual anal sex has now led to us having to imagine all possible offences and include them.

The most recent has come from the discussions about how to deal with the 'rape' of inmates in our correctional facilities. If we had gone ahead with the gender neutral definition of rape, we would not now be running around trying to define all other offences so we don't leave anyone out.

Regulatory regime

It is always difficult to allow any one group to coopt any regulatory regime to the exclusion of others, because it ends up serving only their needs.

The Lawyers' Christian Fellowship has been wielding an inordinate amount of influence over these deliberations and it seems our elected representatives have ceded their responsibilities to this group. While I will be the first to admit that they have raised valid points and made some meaningful contributions, I am a bit apprehensive about allowing what amounts to little more than an unallocated theocratic cabal to be framing legislation in a multicultural, secular democracy.

I think it is long overdue that the government consult with the wider society of some of these legislations and not just the "chosen few" who can shout the loudest.

I am, etc.,

RICHARD SMELLING

Richard.smelling@Gail.comma

Barbados

Via Go-Jamaica