This Belize Referendum Act Amendment issue raises many questions that need some explanation, considering I am a layperson. Simply, how did our initial constitution not provide for public referendum on matters including constitutional changes as would be normal?
If our original constitution had such provisions, how did we, the people, loose those rights or have them modified without our express permission, ESPECIALLY over the constitution that we all must live by?
If we once had those rights I would assume we, the people, would have to agree, by referendum, to give up that power, which never happened as we all know. If this is all the case, would not every single amendment since that time be unconstitutional and as such would have to be struck down?
Could we not wipe the slate clean as it were and reclaim our rights as citizens of Belize?
We could make a new people's government using public referendums as our tool against crooked politicians making necessary adjustments to the constitution and laws and right our wrongs on all levels, but that is why the system has been rigged, to prevent that very thing from happening.

There was never a provision in the Constitution for referendum. The PUP passed the Referendum Act in 1999. In 2008 the UDP amended the Act to require a 60% voter turnout to have validity. They are now seeking to amend again to 50% +1 voter turnout requirement. The Vellos case as decided by the Privy Council held that referendums were not binding on the legislature.
Belize needs a more user friendly and binding Referendum Act so the people themselves can be heard. This is part of the evolution of democracy.

A vote of no confidence could more easily be brought by the Opposition leader?
Is that where this is going?