It is difficult to disagree with the thrust of your editorial of Tuesday, May 26, 2009: 'Imperative of debate on dual citizenship'. Allow me, however, to comment on one matter.

You say that the Opposition People's National Party "has a point - that there are other outstanding constitutional issues to be dealt with and ought to be dealt with. But this one, we feel, is a priority."

One could hardly doubt that this issue is indeed a priority. However, as your editorial correctly states, any change to the constitutional provision governing qualification to sit in the Parliament requires approval by the people of Jamaica in a referendum.

I ask the question, therefore: How could this issue be the subject of discussion by the two political parties without a contemplation of the other substantially agreed proposals for reform and, in particular, those that can only be changed by means of a referendum?

Took PNP to task

I ask this question because, last Thursday, the prime minister, at a press conference to announce the date for the by-election in North East St Catherine, sought to take the PNP and its leader to task for insisting on all the issues being considered together, when some of the other reform matters "required referenda" for any change to be made.

He has publicly stated, more than once, that the provision governing qualification can be changed by the affirmative vote of all the Government members of Parliament. He must obviously have still been labouring under that mistaken impression last Thursday, for the clear inference to be drawn from his statement was that there is no need for any other type of vote, much less the requirement of a referendum.

The opposition leader has already pointed out this requirement to the prime minister. Now that your editorial has done so once again, perhaps he has now grasped the reason why the PNP is insisting that all the issues must be discussed together. After all, financial considerations would dictate that such discussions must contemplate whether one referendum would suffice for the agreed changes to be made.

I am, etc.,

A.J. NICHOLSON

Opposition Spokesman on

Justice