We appear to be moving into options that remind me of the football pools

| More

Mid Ocean News (04 Nov. 2005)
UBP MP John Barritt's 'View From the Hill'

IF at first you don’t succeed, Mr. Editor, try, try again. On the other hand it’s often good political advice to put down the shovel and stop digging when you are in a hole. Either way it is never over until it’s over, and it doesn’t look like the P’s push for independence is going to end any time soon. For those who have been following along, and God bless you if you have been able, we now appear to be moving into options that remind me of the football pools and the permutations punters play to pick a set of sure score draws that actually never do occur.

To summarise, in recent weeks we seem to have gone from decision only by general election; from no jurisdiction ever made the decision by referendum to, sorry, our mistake, maybe there have been some after all; to decision by general election and referendum on the same day; to decision by general election followed by referendum.

On the bright side, it looks like there’s at least some shifting towards what people prefer – a referendum; assuming, Mr. Editor, that it is shift and not spin from The Man who put the extra P in PLP.

I guess that we will hear more on the newest version in the Throne Speech which, while read by the visiting Prince, will have actually been written by the P and his Cabinet, not to mention how BIC also gave them the perfect cue to prolong a debate on independence which BIC could not get off the ground except possibly among the captive audiences of schoolchildren who had no choice.

After all their work BIC came up with a six-pack of recommendations which - surprise, surprise – also serve as six good reasons to encourage the PLP Government on: -

1. The PLP Government should open dialogue with the people of Bermuda on the topic of independence and present its proposals on “the type of government and constitution and all related matters”. BIC: The Sequel, I presume – which also assumes the proposals of the PLP Government will be different than those which the PLP party made to BIC under the auspices of The Man Himself. Go figure.

2. The PLP Government should consult closely with international business companies to remove “any uncertainties” that might arise from a debate on independence and to make sure “myth is separated from reality” by keeping them fully informed. Good idea, close consultation: but shouldn’t this be standard operating procedure with all of us? When it comes to separating myth from reality, Mr. Editor, whose myth and whose reality are we talking about? How about some listening too?

3. Go back to the UK Government and ask them to reconsider withdrawal of British citizenship upon independence. At least that’s an acknowledgment of its value, but haven’t the British already made their position clear, not just to us on any number of occasions but to others as well? They may wonder of course what part of NO we do not understand.

4. The state of race relations in Bermuda needs to be improved, although we do not necessarily need independence for that to happen. BIC suggests “a process of truth and reconciliation” but gave no details on what they had in mind. The P has told us he has plans on this front which will be unveiled in the Throne Speech and I assume he has in mind something more than lessons on how to operate a Blackberry (or write a column).

5. Get from the FCO a list of all Bermuda’s treaty obligations. I don’t know about you Mr. Editor but I would have thought that might been the sort of work which would have been undertaken by a Commission appointed to inquire into independence.

6. I felt the same way too, about this sixth and final recommendation: Government should conduct a review of all international opportunities that currently exist (in international organizations of which we are members) and “the many additional prospects should Bermuda proceed to independence”. The many? But apparently not so important or so obvious or so great to be investigated and reported on by BIC in its Report.

So much then for the comprehensive, fact-finding approach which we were promised by P when he first appointed the Commission. Turns out it ain’t.

Like so much about the report and its findings, Mr. Editor, its selectivity and its language, the discerning reader may hear the voice of Jacob but sense the hand of Esau..

Getting it

BY the way Mr. Editor, before concluding on BIC, let me pause for a moment and see if I have got this straight. I did read - with more than just a passing interest - that advertorial which ten of the fourteen Commissioners paid to have published in The Royal Gazette last week.

They explained to us that BIC only published in the Appendix those submissions to which reference was made in the body of their Report. If there was no mention, the submission was relegated to a the summary found elsewhere in the Appendix. The UBP submission was on the need to decide the question by way of referendum and how it had employed for that purpose in other jurisdictions. But as BIC had asserted in the body of the Report that it found no instance of where a referendum was used to decide the question of independence (which they now say was a mistake) the submission of the Opposition wasn’t mentioned and thus didn’t qualify for publication in the Appendix.

Oh, a kind of convenient Catch 22, I guess: If you’re in, you’re in; if you’re not in, you’re out – mistake or not.

Mr. Editor, I could not make this stuff up if I tried.

Fallen soldier

ASIDE from more on independence in the Throne Speech, I expect the PLP will continue with the Social Agenda theme.

We might hear something on housing. Last year there was the promise of a new Housing Initiative Team, and the promise of a housing programme. Instead what we now have is a change of Ministers. Now I have had my disagreements with Ashfield DeVent, and he has faced up to the criticism, but from where I sit he looks very much like the Fall Guy to me. He gets appointed by P to take on the Berkeley mess (which P created when he was the Minister responsible) and Ashfield takes the heat for axing Pro-Active ( which was a collective Cabinet decision) and soldiers on with a housing programme (which never actually materialised), and stand up for the struggling Bermuda Housing Corporation following the scandal and criminal investigation and millions of dollars being written off, (all of which he inherited from his predecessors in the PLP because it happened on their watch).

Lucky guy, Ashfield.

But who ever said politics was fair? It isn’t.

A ThreePeat

A couple of other items to keep an eye out for –important holdovers from last year:

Parliamentary Election Amendment Act: a move to introduce (finally) absentee balloting which, in the last version which was tabled, didn’t actually provide the right to vote by absentee ballot to everyone. If the amendment isn’t amended, you still won’t have a vote if you happen to be traveling abroad on either the day of the vote or the advance poll.

PATI: the much ballyhooed public access to information paper which does not seem to have excited the masses. Not surprisingly, I think: the information which most people today want are straight answers to their questions .We are being told that this legislation may not be in place until 2011. I’m all for it, Q, but we are not inventing the wheel here. For instance, there’s a draft Bill in circulation in the Caymans.

P.S. I like the idea of a Whistleblower’s Act too. That shows where you really stand on disclosure, transparency and accountability.

PACE: This bill – Police and Criminal Evidence Act – wasn’t taken up before we rose for the summer. It is modeled on the UK Act and their experience and trumpeted as part of the tough new PLP Government package on law and order. What will be interesting to see is whether or not the PLP have in fact been tough in face of behind the scenes criticisms from attorneys of the Bermuda Defence Bar. One of the more contentious, but significant parts of the Bill, in the fight against crime, was the inclusion of a provision which allowed magistrates, judges and juries to draw adverse inferences from defendants who choose to remain silent in certain circumstances when accused of a crime. Did they or did they not back down? Inquiring minds will soon know.

Horsefeathers

FINALLY, Mr. Editor, speaking of independence, the BIC report and the Throne Speech, the following tale comes to mind. It isn’t original, but it is apt.

It’s about the young boy who was eternally optimistic. Too much so. Or so his parents thought. While they sincerely admired his optimism, and regarded it as a good trait, they thought that he also needed to learn that life also had its difficulties as well as its challenges and thus its disappointments. So one Christmas when his expectations were high, they put horse droppings in his stocking.

When on Christmas morning the young boy discovered what was there, he was visibly crestfallen. But not for long.

“Oh, Mum and Dad”, he shouted out – unable to contain himself any longer. “ I know what this means: it means that there must be a pony around here, somewhere!”
There wasn’t – and there isn’t.

Remember, remember, the fifth of November.
Happy Guy Fawkes Day No. 55 everybody.

Archives