There's rarely a moment in a community's political evolution that marks a real turning point, a specific event beginning a sea change in how we consider our choices. Bermuda may have just experienced one, although you might not have noticed and those involved may be unaware as well.

Elections, the saying goes, are about the future. That may be so in an ideal world, but as we all know, Bermuda is another world. For someone like me, who hopefully has more of his life in front of him than behind him, our elections seem like a battle to convince us that the past is in fact the present. For example, a particularly offensive phrase was coined during the 2003 campaign, that Bermudians shouldn't vote themselves "back on the plantation". You don't get any more backwards looking than that.

If you strip away these manipulative tactics, elections should be about proposals for the next five years, which includes recognising the mistakes of yesterday and attempting to address their consequences for a better tomorrow. In Bermuda however, the political parties seem locked in a battle over the 1960s, or earlier. The 2003 election illustrated two alternative approaches towards campaigning, one forward looking the other intended to prevent that.

The UBP conducted a campaign of ideas and adopted the term "new" before their name, indicating a gentle break with the past. The party's strategists resisted the obvious temptation to run a negative campaign attacking the PLP's lacklustre first term, preferring to discuss their plans.

The PLP, driven by a lack of vision, illustrated by a platform published hours before polling day, conducted a predominantly negative campaign demonising their opponents at rallies and in the media. The PLP leadership appears convinced that their fortunes are best served if Bermudians stay frozen in the political past. The most vivid example of this is the continuing comparisons of today's UBP members to slave owners and Uncle Toms, as heard in the notorious 2003 radio ads.

But back to the event that could signal a shift from this rear-view mirror politicking. What was the moment?

The answer is found in five words uttered about the BHC investigation: "Put it all behind us" the Premier said, insisting that we should drop the whole subject of unethical behaviour. What they did was not illegal. Translation: we should be unconcerned with the allegedly unethical and corrupt actions of some current MPs.

That statement and that position are, if you consider them, quite remarkable. The leader of a group of politicians who earn their living dwelling in the past, on things that were legal … but clearly wrong, told us to disregard his Government's recent past, and present. The PLP routinely berate the current members of the UBP, for things that happened up to 400 years ago. I've done some checking and I can confidently say that no one in today's UBP is 400 years old!

We're urged to reject today's UBP candidates because of things that occurred before their time. It's a strategy intended to shift the focus, making the past more relevant than things presently occurring. It is hoped that you dismiss them outright as well as the actions and track record of the current PLP administration.

What you have now, as a result of the Premier's plea, is a credibility gap when his colleagues embark on their next trip far down memory lane. His statement should expose the harping on the past with no vision for the future, as nothing more than hollow diversionary rhetoric and not a genuine concern with righting wrongs.

Voters should be comparing candidates, their values and the proposals they put before us … today. We aren't voting in the past, we're voting for a better future. Suggestions that we be more concerned with events up to 400 years gone than those currently unfolding, should be viewed with great suspicion.

The Government strategy is to put the present behind us while ensuring that the past is squarely before us, in the hope that voters will turn a blind eye to today's events in their pre-occupation with the past.

Maybe it's the idealist in me that longs for a day when Bermuda's political parties are judged for the beliefs, ideas and actions of their current members. Or maybe it's the only way forward.

Only then will our elections be about the future, and only then can we address the legacy of the past.

www.politics.bm