5/26/2006 3:44:00 PM Gay rights: Is Government ready? PLP insider predicts 80 per cent opposition; UBP MPs won’t commit
Premier Alex Scott watches on as controversial drag queen Mark Anderson steals the limelight at the Bermuda Day Parade.
Meredith Ebbin and Nigel Regan
Government MP Renee Webb’s bill to ban discrimination against homosexuals could be headed for a defeat in Parliament today.
Only three Government MPs were willing to state definitely they intend to vote for the bill and the majority of UBP MPs, while claiming to support the proposed amendment in principle, refused to commit themselves one way or the other.
But Health Minister Patrice Minors and Government backbenchers Dennis Lister and Ottiwell Simmons told the Bermuda Sun they will be voting against the bill.
‘No’ votes are also expected to come from Glenn Blakeney, Nelson Bascome, Derrick Burgess, Education Minister Terry Lister and Minister without Portfolio Walter Lister. That makes a total of eight out of 22 Government MPs opposed.
Premier Alex Scott would not comment yesterday, but based on his decision to ban drag queen Mark Anderson from the Bermuda Day parade, a no vote from him is likely as well. Telecommunications Minister Michael Scott is expected to be off the island, which makes for a total of 10 MPs either opposed or absent.
One source said Dame Jennifer Smith could be in the speaker’s chair, which would mean she would only vote if there was a tie.
For the Bill to have any hope of passing, it will need the support of the majority of Opposition MPs.
One Government MP who did not want to be identified predicted 80 per cent of Government MPs would vote against the bill.
Another Government MP said the bill would be in for a rough ride.
Patrice Minors told the Bermuda Sun in an email: “I will not be voting in favour of the Private Member’s Bill.”
Dennis Lister, the brother of Terry Lister and nephew of Walter, confirmed he would be voting against it
He said the fact that it is a conscience vote meant:
“We all have a conscience that is directing us to do the right thing.”
E-mails to Cabinet Ministers Dr. Ewart Brown, Paula Cox, Randy Horton, Michael Scott, Neletha Butterfield and Walter Lister went unanswered.
Drugs Minister Wayne Perinchief did not return a phone call.
Terry Lister could not be reached for comment and is believed to be off the island. Dame Jennifer wouldn’t comment.
On the Opposition side. Suzann Holshouser wouldn’t be drawn which way she’s going to go. However, she said the consensus among her St. David’s constituents was to vote no and she has to respect their wishes.
MP Jahmal Simmons said: “I’m not a big fan of the whole gay thing but I don’t believe people should be discriminated against. I’m more than likely going to be voting for it. My position has always been that whatever goes on in someone’s bedroom is their business.
“I’m 99 per cent certain how I’m going to vote, but I want to see where she [Renee Webb] is going with it.”
MP Trevor Moniz was keeping his cards close to chest.
“I want to see how the debate goes,” he said.
With regards to the voting process, he said it will initially go to a “voice vote”, which is when the Speaker judges the volume of ayes and nays. To find out who voted what requires a “call for names” from three members.
Mr. Moniz said: “The important thing to remember is the PLP has the vote. What we [the UBP] do is a very interesting side show, but it’s all about what the Government’s going to do.”
MP Neville Darrell said: “I was a human rights officer in the province of Ontario — this [sexual orientation] is a simple feature of the human rights code and my mind is fairly clear with regard to the issue.
“But I want to hear the discussion. I want to know how she [Renee Webb] defines sexual orientation and if it lines up with international standards, although I’m sure it will.
“I believe in equality of law for all citizens. I hope it’s a good faith debate instead of being about political entrapment.”
MP Michael Dunkley said: “When Ms Webb tabled this legislation last year she basically came into our room one night and said: ‘Here’s a bill that I’m going to be putting down’, and that was it.
“Someone asked what it was about and she said: ‘I want to make amendments to the Human Rights Act.’ Since that time there’s been no communication with her.
“That’s her main failure. If she’s so concerned about getting things done, I would have thought that she would have not only lobbied her colleagues, but sat down with us as well.
“I don’t tolerate discrimination in any form, but Ms Webb’s amendment is not specific enough and I draw the line somewhere. In this case,
Drawing the line
“I don’t think it’s right to be discriminated against when it comes to employment, but I don’t support same sex marriages. I support the amendment in principle, but I don’t know what her specific intent is.”
MP Jon Brunson said he will vote in favour and MP John Barritt is already on record as expressing his support.
MP Cole Simons would not say.
Earlier Ms Webb said she was confident the bill would pass. Mr. Butler confirmed he would vote in favour and Mr. Foggo said he is against discrimination in any form and will vote yes.
Meanwhile, Mr. Anderson, who was banned from entering the parade as a drag queen after initially being given the go-ahead, said he would be in Parliament watching the debate.
He said instead of banning drag queens from parades Government should be devoting its energies to clearing the streets of drug dealers and bringing in tougher penalties against men who beat their wives.
He also said he is seeking legal advice over not being allowed in the parade as an official entrant.
Reader Comments
Posted: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
Comment by:
S. Hayling
It sadden me to think that a bill has to be past on this subject, this day and age. We live in a humane society where people have a choice how to live their lives, without discrimination. People who chose to this live style are tax payers, and law abiding citizens. For Government to vote against the bill, does not protect all law biding citizens. How can we live in a society this day and age thinking that one group of people is intolerable of another. We are opening doors that have been shut by others to let in the same ignorance they fought against.
Posted: Monday, May 29, 2006
Comment by:
SJ SMITH
FACT.....GAYS AND OTHERS IN THE HOMOSEXUAL COMMUNITY HAVE BEEN AND WILL ALWAYS BE A PART OF OUR COMMUNITY AT LARGE FOREVER.
FACT....THEY ARE DISCRIMINATED AGAINS AS FELLOW HUMANS
FACT...THEY ARE COMMING OUT OF THE CLOSET ALL OVER THE WORLD INCLUDING BERMUDA
FACT...AS LEGISLATORS, IT'S IMPERATIVE THAT AMOUNG THEIR MANY DECISIONS AND DUTIES, THEY ARE CHARGED WITH THE PROTECTION OF "HUMAN RIGHTS". DESPITE THEIR PERSONAL BIAS
AS A SECURE STRAIGHT MALE, I DO NOT IN THE LEAST FEEL THAT MY RIGHTS ARE BEING CHALLENGED OR TAKEN AWAY IN SUPPORTING THAT FREEDOM
.
FINALLY THE YEAR 2006 WITH ALL THAT HAS TAKEN PLACE IN BERMUDA ( AND AROUND THE WORLD) IN REGARDS TO HUMAN RIGHTS ( FREEDOM FOR BLACKS FOR INSTANCE) FOR THE LIFE OF ME, I DON'T GET IT.
THERE WAS A TIME WHEN POLITICIANS IN BERMUDA CHALLEGED THAT FREEDOM AS WELL
IT'S IRRESPONSIBLE AND INHUMAN TO VOTE OTHERWISE. AFTERALL, IT IS ABOUT "HUMAN RIGHTS" !!
SINCERELY,
SJ SMITH
Posted: Saturday, May 27, 2006
Comment by:
Edward E. Smith
It is a shame that this day and age that all persons are still insensitive and and lack humane restraint. After all, "gays" are human and deserve to be accordingly treated. I wonder, had that been one of the opposing MPs' familymembers, would thet feel the same way!
As the previous writer has said, the issue is not legalizing marriages, but merely to recognize and protect the gay person's "rights". This the 2006, not 006; wake up Bermuda, the rest of the Carribean and the rest of the World. Let us do justice to all and let all be justified.
Rest fo all,
Edward.
Not Gay
Posted: Friday, May 26, 2006
Comment by:
ES
I just had to reply to this article. This is so sad because it appears clearly evident that those MP's who are voting against it, obviously do not understand what it is like to be, and live as a homosexuality..and of course, what constitutes human rights. This lifestyle preference isn't chosen, i'm sure you've all heard this before. Do some research and you'll see evidence of this. The problem is, and continues to be, that Bermudians are so closed minded and fail to see the true person (and picture)for who they really are. I am certain that the bill is merely asking for homosexuals to be "protected" by law..and not asking for gay marriage to be legal. Protection of such persons is currently implemented (and has been for several years) in numerous business establishments world wide. Just look at it as being similar to racism. Whites against blacks, blacks against whites, and heterosexuals against homosexuals. There are many homosexuals who are kind, sincere, law abiding, prominent persons in society, and upstanding citizens who do so much for the well being of Bermuda. Why can't they be protected legally against the cruel close minded people of Bermuda.. and why should they face (on a daily basis)ongoing discimination, harassment, belittling, etc, and have to live in a society where they cannot just be themselves... but having to live and work in constant fear? It's so sad... people should be treated equally.. and Govt should know better..stop being so negative on this issue. By doing so it gives the impression that Govt doesn't care about the person for who they really are, as a human being, and their contribution (like everyone else, to Bermuda)...maybe they will understand these people better, once they realize that their loved one, i.e. son, daughter, nephew, niece, sister, or brother discloses their sexual preferrence as being homosexual! Would they disown their child, clearly not I hope. Bermuda needs to open their hearts and minds and stop being so close minded, and get up to date with the rest of the world. Racism and slavery is a thing of the past, so should the "gay" issue.. You dont have to like these people, but hey, let them live a normal life! Is that too much to ask for?
