In recent months, Premier Natalio “Sowande” Wheatley has rightly drawn increasing attention to the lingering problems associated with the Virgin Islands’ colonial history.
If he is truly committed to confronting those challenges, he should now take the lead in opening the House of Assembly’s committee sessions to the public.
For decades, the HOA’s most consequential deliberations — on budgets, bills and now constitutional reform itself — have been conducted behind closed doors.
These private committees of the whole House are a vestige of the colonial era, and they have no place in a modern democracy that aspires to full self-government.
Mr. Wheatley said this month that he supports “a healthy debate” about ending the practice.
But in our view, there is no need for a debate. The closed-door sessions are indefensible, and they should end immediately.
Consider the VI’s current system of lawmaking.
After a bill is introduced and discussed publicly, the most critical work — clause-by-clause scrutiny and amendment — happens in secret. The final version is not revealed until it appears in the Gazette after the governor’s assent, sometimes months or years later (or not at all if the governor withholds assent).
Budget sessions, too, are shrouded in secrecy, with Standing Finance Committee deliberations fully closed to the public. The redacted reports released after the fact are often confusing and incomplete at best.
Such opacity is not the norm in modern democracies. In the United Kingdom — the very parliament after which the VI’s legislature was modeled — committee proceedings are open to the public except in rare cases involving national security.
Why, then, should VI residents be denied the same transparency?
Closed-door governance breeds distrust. The ongoing private talks on constitutional reform are a case in point. Another example came when the public learned recently that legislators had secretly voted to double their own salaries during a private meeting.
By contrast, openness builds credibility.
Allowing residents to witness the give-and-take of committee discussions — as was also recommended recently by the Constitutional Review Commission — would promote accountability and educate the public about how laws are actually made.
It would also demonstrate that elected officials have nothing to hide and that democracy in the VI is strong enough to withstand sunlight.
Of course, some concerns about confidentiality may be valid.
Public officers testifying before the SFC, for instance, may sometimes need privacy to discuss sensitive security matters. But as in the UK, such cases can be handled through narrowly tailored exceptions — not by blanket secrecy.
Ending legislative secrecy is precisely the kind of reform that would show the UK — and, more importantly, the people of the VI — that the government is ready to take the next step toward political maturity as it heads into constitutional negotiations.
Self-determination is not just a slogan to be repeated at the United Nations: It is a principle that must be lived out in daily governance. And every resident should be able to see, hear and understand how decisions are made in their name.
The premier has already shown that he is willing to challenge outdated norms. Now, he should lead again — this time by introducing an amendment to the HOA Standing Orders to make all committee sessions public except where confidentiality is strictly necessary.
Besides helping to modernise the legislative process, this move would also send a clear signal that the VI is ready to govern itself with openness, integrity and confidence.