The Heat of Debate

The Prime Minister last week made his budget presentation. The country took time out over the weekend to digest the contents and mull over the various aspects of the document. All in a quiet and reflective-enough mood.
And then came yesterday morning and the floodgates burst open.
We have mentioned before that with the exception of Sir John Compton, Stephenson King and Rufus Bousquet on the one side, and Dr. Kenny Anthony and Phillip J. Pierre on the other, that all the other members of the House were first-timers at the exercise of making contributions to the budget debate, like so many new ships on their maiden voyage.
In that kind of setting, no one could foretell what level of debate would ensue. No one would be surprised if the contributions were relatively poor, failing to come even close to what we had become accustomed to over the years … from the seasoned politicians, some renowned for the excellence of their oratory, who have made their mark on our legislative history down through the years.
Thus far, it must be remarked, we have been pleasantly surprised. The “neophytes” – from both sides of the House – who have made their presentations to date have done so with a level of professionalism and ease of delivery that would do credit to members with numbers of years under their belts.
At time of going to press, we have been privileged to listen to just a few of the representatives seated around the table … but what we have heard, the intensity of the fire in the various presentations, augurs well for the entirety of this first session of the budget debates slated to be held with the UWP government at the helm.
Apparently, we need not have worried. The elected members have so far made sensible – in some cases even fiery – contributions, in an atmosphere that, in addition, contains a level of decorum that at one time, seemed to have been lost, within the walls of the House.
It is to be hoped that the standard is maintained … today and in the future.