November 19, 2012Dear Sir,I would like to begin by publicly apologising to Dr Eva Hodgson. In an earlier letter to the Editor, I stated that Dr Hodgson had received substantial funding from the Progressive Labour Party Government. Dr Hodgson responded by emphatically stating that she has never received more than $25 from the PLP. I believe Dr Hodgson to be a person of integrity, and therefore if she says that she has never received more than $25, then it must be true. In my defence, I had made such statement based on information given to me by a PLP Cabinet Minister who told me that the PLP Government had provided substantial funding to Dr Hodgson. I was also informed that the PLP Government pays Dr Hodgson’s family hundreds of thousands of dollars in rent for Government office space. I have no idea why a PLP Cabinet Minister would give me incorrect information, but in any event, I apologise to Dr Hodgson for any harm she may have suffered from my making a statement that I now understand to be false.Since we now know that Dr Hodgson has no personal financial motive for supporting the PLP, let’s look at the reason she herself states for her support. In her November 16 Letter to the Editor, Dr Hodgson acknowledges that the PLP has made many “blunders” and states that she is voting for the PLP because she believes it would be harmful to the psychological health of blacks to have the One Bermuda Alliance “white” party clean up the mess created by the PLP “black” party. The first problem with that argument is that the principal reason the OBA is known in some circles as a “white party” is that the PLP has gone to great lengths to label them a white party, which then allows the PLP to make skin colour the central issue of the election. It appears irrelevant that the OBA has a wide diversity of race in both its candidates and supporters. But then again, since the PLP were always going to campaign on the basis of skin colour, they really had no choice but to label the opposition as the white party no matter what the reality.The second problem is that a strong argument can be made that the principal reason the PLP have made such a mess of the country has nothing to do with the colour of their skin and everything to do with the way they are elected. PLP supporters have repeatedly argued that blacks should vote for the PLP simply because they are black. But as leading racial-equity advocates such as Dr Cornell West have argued, voting for someone solely because they are black not only denigrates the black race (because it cynically implies that these candidates would not get elected if they were judged solely on their intelligence, honesty and record in office) but also leads to Government corruption (because if these politicians know they will get your vote even if they were to line their own pockets at the expense of the country, then they will surely do so).It would appear that the PLP’s record of the last 14 years is proof of the wisdom of Dr West’s warning. PLP cronyism and incompetence, as recorded by two successive Auditors General, has resulted in massive cost overruns exceeding $100 million, a national debt of more than $1.4 billion, the exodus of numerous International Companies, massive job losses, a collapsing real estate market and huge pain and suffering throughout the country, particularly in poorer black communities. But the biggest flaw with Dr Hodgson’s reasoning is that it rests on the proposition that the PLP can fix its own mistakes. Unfortunately, that is not possible as long as Premier Cox continues her refusal to give the Auditor General the power to subpoena the books and records of connected contractors to properly investigate potential Government corruption and kickbacks.The problem is that if Premier Cox gives the AG that power, the AG will have the ability to not only investigate future corruption, she also will have the power to investigate past corruption. That means that Premier Cox’s political ability to end the corruption rests on her belief than none of her fellow PLP Cabinet Ministers acted improperly or received any personal benefit in connection with TCD, Port Royal, the new Courthouse, Berkeley Institute, Heritage Wharf, and other Government scandals. When you consider that Premier Cox refused to sanction anyone for numerous violations of the Financial Instructions laws in connection with these contracts, that she refused to give the AG the power to review legally privileged documents, and that she withheld documents from the AG by falsely claiming a legal privilege that doesn’t exist, it is highly unlikely that Premier Cox is now going to give the AG subpoena power to properly investigate Government corruption. (For a fuller explanation of these points see “Kevin Comeau’s Response to Public Statement Made by Premier Cox” on the Good Governance Institute of Bermuda website (www.bdagoodgov.org).)So Dr Hodgson’s theory of the PLP cleaning up its own mess only has credibility if you believe that no PLP Minister was involved in any of the massive scandals of the last 14 years. That’s a pretty big if. On the other hand, a new party with no past scandals could easily give the AG subpoena power to investigate past and future scandals. That raises an interesting point. The PLP claim that the OBA is merely the UBP in disguise and that the UBP has a history of cronyism. Those allegations would appear groundless if the OBA were to promise to give subpoena power to the AG. Remember, there is no statute of limitations under the Bermuda Criminal Code — the AG can investigate allegations as far back as she chooses, including anything the UBP did while in office.Voters now have an interesting means of discerning who is telling the truth in this election they can ask Premier Cox and Craig Cannonier if they plan to give the AG subpoena power to investigate connected contractors. The person who refuses to give an unqualified yes has no intention of cleaning up Government corruption. So unless Premier Cox gives an unqualified commitment to give the AG that power, Dr Hodgson’s hope of the PLP cleaning up its own mess is a practical impossibility. And if Craig Cannonier refuses to give that commitment, the OBA really is the UBP in disguise. Let’s see who is lying and who is telling the truth.KEVIN COMEAUCalifornia