by Rick Lowe

N.B. Forgive the similarity to this post, but the process of creating laws was designed to prevent the issues that have developed with the passing of the referenced Bills.

The social media frenzy of opposition from certain quarters to the Commercial Enterprise Bill, 2017 is a direct result of Parliament not following the guidelines for developing laws.

A similar thing is happening with the Fisheries Resources (Jurisdiction and Conservation) (Flats Fishing) Regulations, 2017 except the opposition to or recommendations for amendments are emanating from different quarters.

The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association's guidelines on how laws should be made are clear:

1. Identifying Issues And Opportunities.
2. Proposals for New Laws/Amendments.
3. Stakeholder Consultation: Preparation of a ‘green paper’, which gives an introductory outline of the idea. Following consultation, a ‘white paper’ might be produced, giving a more concrete statement of the government’s intentions.
4. Proposals are Made Into ‘Bills': Proposals for new laws are sent to the Office of the Attorney General (AG) where the lawyers there turn the instructions of the Cabinet into special forms called “Bills” (with) detailed language that reduces the chance that the intention of the bill may be misinterpreted.

There is a tremendous amount of effort (sweat equity) that goes into the preparation of legislation, either from special interest groups (in the case of the fly fishing legislation) or civil servants and politicians (in the case of the Commercial Enterprise Bill) and when amendments are offered after the bill is drafted people take umbrage.

The opprobrium from the proponents of the flyfishing law and the opponents of the Commercial Enterprise Bill, while mostly the same people, it all provides a lesson for the government and the process they use to create legislation.

Kickstarting economic growth is no doubt an urgent matter hence the Commercial Enterprise Bill. The fly fishing regulations present no such urgency. However, it is important to note the governments willingness to look at amendments to both Bills.

Will the government and proponents of legislation follow the proper procedures going forward? If history is our guide it's doubtful, but the present government promised to be different.

Time will tell if they meant what they said.