Martin HenryIT HAS taken a major uprising for the Executive of Government (the Cabinet) to partially return to the Legislature of Government (the Parliament) one of the Legislature's most basic functions, the determination of taxation.
The development of Parliamentary democracy has been deeply influenced by the principle of "no taxation without representation". After the American colonists rebelled against Britain precisely on this point, they wrote into their Constitution as the first responsibility of the legislature, "The Congress shall have power: To lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises". President Bush now finds it necessary to appeal to citizens directly to appeal to their Congressional representatives to support his proposal for a roll-back in federal taxation. The Jamaican Finance Minister has been allowed to walk into Parliament, and impose taxes, sometimes with immediate effect with less than 24 hours notice for compliance.
The Parliament, dominated by large Government majorities in recent years, has simply rubber-stamped the autocratic will of one man who is only nominally the mouthpiece of the Cabinet on the basis of 'collective responsibility' if not collective decision-making, understanding and agreement.
There have been hints here and there in the past that not even a Prime Minister who is not also the Finance Minister is fully conversant with announced tax packages and Budgets.This appears to be so in the case of the hands-off Prime Minister Patterson who seems to have virtually surrendered policy and the Budget to his Finance Minister. In any case, the Cabinet has no constitutional power 'to lay and collect taxes'. It should be forced to do exactly what the President of the United States has to do and what our Constitution demands: Go to the Legislature and argue and beg for tax increases.
Today there is a by-election in the constituency of Northeast St. Ann because Danny Melville, the former holder of the seat has resigned. Mr. Melville gave a clear and reasoned statement to the public and his constituents as to why he had chosen to resign. In essence, the role of the Member of Parliament as Godfather, Sugar Daddy and Don, and enforced loyalty to the political party in the face of disagreements over the role, functions and operations of Government, precipitated a conscience resignation.
Mr. Melville's expose of the rottenness of the system and how it works against the interests of citizens has been quietly sidelined by the glib PR of the PNP, led by the capable Maxine Henry-Wilson, and by the somnolence of a media not terribly seriously committed to the defence of liberty and parliamentary democracy. Mr. Melville, a late-comer to the politics of tribal struggle for scarce resources and a spoil-sport who is too independent in pocket and conscience for unprotesting participation, apparently clearly understands the constitutional purpose of Parliament.
"Subject to the provisions of this [Jamaican] Constitution, Parliament may make laws for the peace, order and good government of Jamaica." Section 48 (1). Nowhere is this single responsibility greater than in the legislative determination of taxation who should be taxed, what should be taxed, why, and to what level? Jamaica has become the most over-taxed and the most under-served CARICOM state, with the exception of Guyana. It is the most heavily indebted with some 60 per cent of tax revenue committed to debt servicing. The figure will be higher when the FINSAC debt kicks in this fiscal year.
The tax system is inequitable and punitive. And the population is not convinced that the tax burden can be justified in terms of the services provided by the state from revenue. The betrayal of the people by their Parliamentary representatives who have put party ahead of constituency has precipitated a sharp backlash on the streets. The biggest uprising since 1938 took place in April 1999 ostensibly over a sharp and sudden hike in the tax on gasoline. Our historic "Gas Tax Riots" have joined a long list of tax rebellions in the struggle to restrain the greed of governments.
The anger of the Jamaican people at Budget time 1999, as the Government must surely have learned by this, was over much more than the margin of tax increase on gas. In a largely spontaneous, "enough is enough", uprising, the people protested the impositions of a callous Government which seem set on milking them beyond capacity with little to show for it. The protests were well ahead of Opposition response and capacity to organise. Indeed, the only substantial political organising was the suppression of protests by the area leaders in the garrisons of the governing party for which thanks were duly and publicly handed out by the party leader and Prime Minister.
Cross-class uprising
The restraint of the security forces should have sent a strong message to the Government. The police and army did not side with the Government against hard-pressed people whose cup of endurance had flowed over. While there was some looting and burning, the comparatively low level of destruction also sent a clear message about the purpose and intent of this unusual cross-class uprising.
Parliament is fundamentally and historically a device for restraining the power of the King/Executive in the interest of the people's liberty. It is a mechanism for taking off the streets and off the battlefield the people's concerns and protests. The American constitutional drafters quickly discovered a key deficiency in the base document and quickly attached Amendment One which says in part "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances." When the Government grows deaf, autocratic and unresponsive while burdening citizens beyond tolerable limits, the expressions of grievances cannot be guaranteed to be peaceful.
Unfortunately, the Jamaican people have been schooled in the art of street protest by their political masters, not in the art of citizenship. It did not require the Moses Committee, which was set up as a professedly penitent response to the Gas Riots, to have told Government to restore the functions of Parliament with respect to taxation.
The proposed restoration is only partial, but is a big step in the right direction of restoring the Parliament itself to its proper functions.
Contrary to those who argue that the nature of tax increases require secrecy, new taxes should be the most publicly and heatedly discussed item on the Parliamentary agenda. A democratic government should cautiously proceed with fear and trembling to impose new taxes and only with the clearest cost-benefit justification which can be persuasively sold to the people by their voted representatives, rather than the people waiting in helpless fear and trembling to hear what new tax burdens a Minister of Finance will impose on them by regal fiat while arrogantly declaring that there will be, there can be, no roll-back.
Martin Henry is a communications consultant.
