It was a criticism that was bound to be levelled, Mr Editor, and so it was. Bermuda could use an America’s Cup approach to public education.

Everyone knows it too, and have known for a long, long time. How long? Long enough.

Our political parties have certainly recognised this — at least when it comes to acknowledging the problem in their campaigns and their promises to fix it.

The need for educational reform has been a major issue at just about every general election.

The voting public are not naive. They know reform will not, and cannot happen overnight. What they look for, for starters, and for sure, is commitment.

The PLP had during its years in power been criticised fiercely but with justification for its revolving door of Ministers for Education. The portfolio was starting to look like the poisoned chalice it had been in the days of the UBP. A graveyard for politicians who, if they had any political ambitions to go further, were well advised to steer clear. At least that’s what it looked like.

It was easy to level the criticism and it struck a resonant chord with those who were unhappy with public education, with the physical state of our schools, with the performance of our teachers and the results of our students.

It was all the more surprising then when, upon election, the new OBA Government appointed as the Minister for Education a relative unknown, someone with no parliamentary experience and no visible or known record, political or otherwise, on the state of public education in Bermuda and what needed to be done.

The MP who had been the Opposition spokesman on Education, who had led the charge and who had been the chief critic, was given the new portfolio of Economic Development. That was message number one. Message number two came about a year later when the first Minister was relieved of his portfolio and a seat at the Cabinet table.

Responsibility for the Ministry finally was given to the MP who was formerly the Opposition Shadow except now he had to share his time and attention with the equally important portfolio of Economic Development.

That was message number three. It wasn’t subliminal either. On the contrary, it has been overt. No amount of political spin can change the impression that is given of the importance our Government attaches to education.

It was reinforced in fact, with the appointment of yet a third Minister in a little over two years. The man who had been the Shadow for all those years, and responsible for education for just over a year, and who had spearheaded the challenging but successful drive for the America’s Cup, was going to stick with Economic Development. Not Education. Message number four.

Now we all understand the Minister doesn’t actually run the Ministry, but his presence and his clout and his talent give it direction, and those in education, whether teachers, students or parents, are more likely to grow in confidence when they believe they are led by a Minister and a Government who appear and act committed to the cause and to the need for reform.

Ministerial musical chairs does not cut it. Consequently, the new Minister has a lot of ground to make up — and quickly, one hopes, for the sake of our children, for whom a good sound education is vital if they and we are to succeed, with or without an America’s Cup.