Was it a simple human error that anyone could make? Or the action of an incompetent Speaker who must be replaced? Sarah Lagan spoke with analysts on all sides of the political spectrum to get their views on the unprecedented attempt to censure Randy Horton, the House of Assembly Speaker.

If there’s one thing Stanley Lowe learnt during his 14 years as Speaker of the House of Assembly, it is that you cannot please all of the people all of the time.

Perhaps it should be no surprise that, while many in the Progressive Labour Party have been sharpening their knives for their long-serving colleague Randy Horton, Mr Lowe takes a gentler stance.

“To err is human, to forgive is divine,” was the phrase Mr Lowe swore by during his spell in the Speaker chair from 1998 to 2012.

Reflecting on the controversy surrounding Mr Horton, he told The Royal Gazette: “I don’t believe the censure should have been brought at all. He had already apologised to the House — that is the end of the matter.

“The other point is, these kinds of motions are supposed to be dealt with in a timely fashion — they don’t sit on the order paper indefinitely.”

The motion of censure against Mr Horton was brought by the PLP this month, amid claims that he breached parliamentary procedure by refusing to hear a point of order from David Burt, the Shadow Minister of Finance, early this year.

After being held on the order paper for four months, the motion failed by 17 votes to 15, on July 17, the final House of Assembly sitting of the session except for a one-off sitting scheduled for August 17.

Ironically, Mr Horton was supported by many One Bermuda Alliance MPs who have been his opponents for much of his political career.

It came against a backdrop of PLP discontent for Mr Horton which has been simmering since he accepted the OBA’s request to become Speaker shortly after the 2012 General Election — effectively costing the PLP a vote.

During the debate, Mr Horton was accused of bias towards the OBA.

But Mr Lowe laughed: “They used to say that about me. They do it because they don’t get things their way; that is the usual tactic that members of the Opposition will use.”

Criticism, however, came from Jonathan Starling, the former PLP member who ran as an Independent in the last election.

Mr Starling believes that Mr Horton has made one mistake too many and that there should also be a Commission of Inquiry into bribery allegations made during the censure debate.

“I have felt that he has had a poor grasp of parliamentary procedure to the point of incompetence,” Mr Starling said.

“I don’t think he should continue as Speaker due to his apparent incompetence. I think we need a full Commission of Inquiry on the allegations. I think it is in the OBA’s interests to do so, unless of course they are guilty.

“Additionally, I think the whole debate around the Speaker, and the allegations, raises a number of constitutional questions and highlights, once more, the need for campaign finance laws and stronger anti-corruption laws — even if the allegations are untrue.”

Christian Dunleavy, a former United Bermuda Party candidate and political commentator, argued the motion was part of an ongoing tactical plan by the Opposition to see Parliament dissolved.

“I think he [Mr Horton] has made some mistakes probably on both sides in terms of allowing things to be said,” Mr Dunleavy said.

“The one thing I would say is that you can’t just keep making the same order over and over again and David Burt is really into the minutia of the rules. He tactically tries to make it very difficult by continually making points of order. At some point, the Speaker just has to say enough, we have to move on. Whether he should have thrown him out I don’t know.

“He said he made mistakes so I don’t understand why it had to go to that next step although I understand why politically — it is another step in the continual process that has been, from day one, trying to find a reason to change the numbers in the House in their favour to dissolve Parliament. It is a lot of tactics.”

Charles Jeffers, the former leader of the National Liberal Party, also questioned the real motives behind the motion.

“It is no secret that the PLP feels betrayed by Mr Horton’s decision to accept the role of Speaker,” Mr Jeffers said.

“The censure motion was, in my view, a real attempt to have him ousted from the position. I see no reason for Mr Horton to step down as Speaker. The reasons are simple — there were no strong arguments against his ability or performance.

“The argument about his admission that, on second thought, he would have made a different decision on the matter that was at the root of the motion carried, no real weight. The motion was made, argued and it was defeated.”

Asked how parliamentarians should proceed moving forward, Mr Jeffers said: “Partisanship, power and prestige must give way to the ‘P’ that really matters — the people.”

On that subject, Mr Dunleavy said: “I have listened to Parliament for a long time now and I think this is as insane as I have ever heard it.

“It is always hostile and intense but I find some of the speeches being made now are totally nuts. If you are going to make an allegation of corruption you have to have more substance to it than to say somebody told me that someone is corrupt.

“If you are a legislator to make that argument you have responsibility to substantiate it.”

As for Mr Lowe — he believes the Speaker deserves respect.

“Even if you don’t agree with him, you respect him,” he said.