By IVOINE INGRAHAM

Politics is not the time for nursery rhymes. It is not “one two buckle my shoe, three four shut the door”, or “goosey gander, where should I wander”, which are for kids and should not be allowed to enter politics. Politicians must refrain from stale humour to convince intelligent people that the presentations have some seriousness, expecting people to buy the jokes. It is disrespectful and politically suicidal if anyone thinks that the Bahamian people can be tricked with utter foolishness this time.

It’s high time we raised the bar for those vying to be candidates in our parliament. Political organisations should make it a non-negotiable requirement that potential candidates undergo thorough psychological evaluations. This is not just a formality but a crucial step to ensure that those who seek to represent us are mentally sound, emotionally stable, and capable of handling the intense pressures of debate, campaigning, the ongoing demands of public service and potential defeat. This measure is not just a formality, but a reassurance that our potential representatives are fit for the job. 

Politicians are servants sent to do our bidding and should not do so flippantly.

When we tune in to The Parliamentary Channel, we often witness not a healthy debate but a verbal battlefield. The personal insults and crude innuendos hurled at each other have no place in our political discourse. Our children are watching and are not impressed. We must demand a more respectful and dignified exchange of ideas that our children, the future voters, can look up to and learn from. This is not just a wish, but a call to action for a more civil and constructive political environment, giving us hope for a better future for our children. Serious suggestions in the best interest of all Bahamians should not be treated frivolously.

Some of us are or grew up in youth organisations, where we learned how to debate, execute, and gain an advantage. We know a thing or two. But discipline, self-respect, and respect for other people’s opinions could be the foundation for debate.

However, from observation of the many debates shown live on television, there is a disappointment in the behaviour that speaks to an obnoxious level of irresponsibility. Our impressionable youth copy this behaviour, thinking one must become combative and lose self-respect to get the point across. But neither is necessary because if one is skilled enough, they would use tactics that can be seen and heard clearly, which is what “ring generals” do.

So, in the upcoming processes to select candidates and revisit the present members, a psychological evaluation must be part of the criteria needed to qualify, even to be a candidate, which indicates we are serious about the calibre of individuals we want in our parliament. 

We must settle for no less than the best among us to act on our behalf, who are working for us, so we should hire someone with the gravitas to be in that position. No longer should the most popular be selected because we would be comfortable with our peers just like us; therefore, anyone would fall through the cracks.

Hiring the best for the job is paramount; otherwise, how could we complain if we picked someone we knew before who could not cut the mustard? How could we complain we were shortchanged when we selected someone about whom we had many unanswered questions in the beginning?

We have a saying that after we make a grave mistake, we say, “One mind tells me don’t do that”, but we don’t follow that mind, which is a fact that your spirit is directing you. If your spirit is unsettled now, you are making the wrong choice. Your spirit is never wrong; it is when you employ your mind to devise why you should dismiss your spirit and rely on the human mind, which has failed you countless times before.

We are in the driver’s seat; we determine who speaks for us. If we get carried away with fairy tales and nursery rhymes, we deserve to live in la la land.

We call this the “silly season”, a term that describes the period leading up to elections when political discourse often becomes more heated and less rational. But surprisingly, some take “silly” seriously, which is a cause for concern.

Face reality: We all have reservations about politicians, so the least we could do to satisfy our curiosities is to examine them to see if they have all of their marbles, meaning if they are mentally sound and competent. Nothing more, nothing less. The behaviour in parliament often leaves a lot to be desired, with personal attacks and disrespectful language overshadowing the critical issues.