In today's interview Max Burgess says alot that I agree with (ie. the chicken and egg quote and the next election being a referendum on the UBP's future rather than the PLP's desirability - a point I made when interpreting the last poll (last sentence)).
I can't help but note that the article ended with what can only be read as a very ironic position with respects to the party re-establishing a black caucus (a concept I have no problem with in principle):
He said under Sir Edward Richards the UBP had to form a black caucus to get black issues on the agenda.“In some ways, history repeats itself. I believe the UBP is heading that way – to have a black caucus to ensure the needs of black Bermuda are in the fore of the party’s minds.”
Firstly, the majority of the UBP caucus is already black, so I'm not sure what a separate black caucus will achieve that couldn't already be.
Secondly, Max suggests that a black caucus is needed to 'ensure the needs of black Bermuda are in the fore of the party’s minds'.
Here's the problem with that: Max stated sentences earlier that white leaders had been more progressive on the issue of race than blacks in the party:
He said the UBP had moved backwards on the race issue since switching from Grant Gibbons to Wayne Furbert.“Under Grant Gibbons the question of race and what we could reasonably be expected to do about it was on the agenda and was being worked on.
“There were committees doing work on it. In some ways that’s the irony of the UBP and its history.
“White leaders have historically made measured strides, but some strides in this whole area of race, and perhaps with the exception of Sir John Swan who had varying degrees of success on the subject, black leaders have not done as well.”
Seems contradictory does it not?
