THERE'S a grandiosity so epically wrongheaded about the Premier's recent statements on everything from Independence to the widespread corruption within his administration that a preliminary diagnosis of Napoleon Complex would not be entirely out of order, a sense of infallibility as divorced from objective reality as a lead balloon suffering from delusions of airworthiness.

Taking its name from the dimutive French dictator, this condition tends to apply to individuals who are slight in stature, physically, intellectually or morally, but who are aggressively intent on pursuing their ambitions and establishing absolute control.

From time to time this neurosis has been known to manifest itself in the leaderships of countries, resulting in martinets-in-the-making like Bermuda's Premier advocating objectives that are in entirely inverse proportion to both their abilities and means.

The Premier, it seems, is intent on spreading his to the rest of Bermuda, persuading, cajoling or simply wearing locals down to the point where they unquestioningly subscribe to his view of reality ? a view so increasingly distorted it's normally only associated with sideshow halls of mirrors, the zealous belief systems of religious fanatics or the dreamlike internal worlds of drug addicts.

In recent days the Premier has made clear he puts no stock in the concept of Government accountability as it relates to the multi-million-dollar boondoggle that is the new Berkeley Institute, now two years over schedule and untold millions of dollars over budget ("I'd do it all again"); he has compared, straight-faced, the potential role of an Independent Bermuda on the global stage to that of one of the Great Powers ("our relationship with the United Kingdom will be . . . one of mutual respect between equals"); he has spoken to his yearning to be Prime Minister of a sovereign Bermuda by any means necessary ? those means, specifically the ones he's employing to undermine the prospects of a referendum on the issue, being justifiable because his is a Revealed Political Truth not open to reason, criticism, or second-guessing.

Seemingly oblivious to the fact the island's economy is being increasingly jeopardised because he prefers to see Bermuda's reality through a fog of mirages rather than as it is, the Premier does not so much continue to put his spin on recent events as attempt to deny them.

No one except the Premier himself has ever claimed that Alex Scott is a spinmeister. And the fact is that it's an entirely inappropriate description for his political methodology. Those who engage in political spin interpret an event or issue in such a way that it either advances a specific political agenda or diminishes the political fall-out from a negative occurence. It is crucial that any distortions spin masters introduce into their partisan re-telling of events relate directly to the facts of the matter being spun. When done skilfully, the electorate is then prone to believe the propaganda has some factual basis as well.

But Bermuda's Premier is increasingly dispensing with the facts altogether. He does not so much put his spin on the issues confronting Bermuda as actually invent the issues he wants to top the island's agenda.

Given the increasingly surreal political landscape of the "New" Bermuda, it's perhaps not altogether surprising this newspaper received a letter from a dead man this week ? a dead man offering a succinct but highly insightful critique of the Premier's approach to Independence.

In fact, family members forwarded a letter from the late brother, Michael Keegan, who died in 1993, which had originally appeared in the columns ofin 1977 when the question of Independence first became a major political issue in Bermuda.

Normally, a 27-year-old letter would be dropped into the waste paper basket, an outdated memento from days long gone by. But on discovering this one, yellowed and torn, it occurred to his family that not only does it still make good reading but deals in a concise and telling way with a subject that has once again become the topic of the day.

Nothing has changed since Michael Keegan penned his letter except the players on the Bermudian political stage; but they are acting out the same script that was being used in 1977.

Occasionally, Michael Keegan's sister, Jane Pocock of Warwick, comes across old friends who her brother attended school with in the 1930s, but they are all old now ? in their late 70s or 80s. Keegan, having been called to the Bar in Bermuda, defended a few Legal Aid cases in front of his cousin, the late Chief Justice Sir J. Trounsell Gilbert, so may also be remembered among older members of the legal fraternity.

Perhaps these background notes may interest some readers but the points he raised in his letter should be of interest to all. They remain as relevant and compelling as they were when he addressed them in 1977.

Dear Sir:

Independence is an intoxicating word and since my last visit eight months ago, a lot of people appear to have become rather inebriated by it. Before your readers question my right as a mere visitor to comment on such matters, may I say that for seven years I was educated here, my mother is from an old Bermuda family, and I have visited the island annually for 40 years.

In addition, I was privileged to be a member of the UK House of Commons for five years, representing Nottingham South (Castle Ward), the only member of the House of Commons from Bermuda, so I am told.

A glance at the papers during the last ten days has focused my attention on such phrases as "legitimate aspirations of the people", "expressing the true will of Bermudians" and similar high-sounding phrases.

All this makes my proud little homeland sound pathetic, instead of what it plainly is ? one of the most successful economies in the world with an envious standard of living, far superior to that of the Caribbean, with which it is often irritatingly confused.

I get the impression that the cause of Independence is espoused for emotional rather than practical reasons. May I then ask a few practical questions to which practical answers should be given?

What, of any importance, could an Independent Bermuda do that a dependent one can't?

Are Bermudians suffering under the oppressive yoke of a colonial power?

Are they restrained from doing anything for their own benefit?

Are they not, in fact, as independent as any people in the world?

What extra benefits can this additional and cripplingly expensive constitutional Independence bring?

Since virtually the only right denied by its Constitution in this already very independent Island is to conduct its own foreign policy, I assume that those who desire Independence do so for some reason connected therewith. It is therefore essential that both political parties should outline their foreign policies forthwith. How otherwise can the electorate decide what the effect of Independence will be?

Since an essential prerequisite of political Independence is the ability, either alone or in alliance, to defend oneself, it is fair to ask how this will be done. The former is impossible, the latter therefore essential. But with whom?

Is Bermuda immediately to ally itself with Britain, whose umbilical cord it has just cut?

America is scarcely likely to assume responsibility unless the island were in extremis.

The questions above are serious ones and should be answered.

In conclusion, it appears to me that the benefits of Independence to a country which already controls its own internal polices, as well as its economic, commercial and monetary affairs will be small.

A new flag perhaps?

Once constitutionally independent of British ties, Bermuda is at permanent risk to predators, Independence being irreversible,and there are plenty of them.