Log In

Reset Password

Open debate?

Premier Alex Scott's press conference last week has stated to make it clear how he plans to frame the Independence debate.

While he has called for an open debate, in which those for and against Independence should speak openly and be prepared to listen to other views, his own approach has been quite different, at least so far.

Rather than debate the issues, he has gone out of his way to pick fights with the British Government.

These included the row over the appointment of the Chief Justice, in which he pushed hard for the appointment of Bermudian Puisne Judge Norma Wade Miller against the Governor's choice of Richard Ground, who is British. It is worth contrasting Mr. Scott's very public defence of Mrs. Wade Miller with the appointment of New Zealander Barry Coupland as Director of Marine and Ports over the application of Bermudian Michael Dolding.

The cases are very similar. Both Mrs. Wade Miller and Mr. Dolding could claim to have the qualifications and experience for the jobs they sought, but in both cases, the appointing authorities felt they were the wrong people for the job, as was their right. And yet in one case, we have a very public dispute, while in the other, we have a conspicuous silence on the part of the Premier.

The reason? In the case of the Chief Justice, Mr. Scott could attack the Governor and in the other, he could not.

Now Mr. Scott has picked a fight with the British Government over Bermuda's role in Caricom. Mr. Scott has backed Caricom's position protesting the departure of Jean-Bertrand Aristide, in opposition to Britain, which supports the United Nations intervention in that tragic country.

Laving aside the issues involved, which fall into the "choose your poison" category, Mr. Scott clearly was intruding in external affairs that remain Britain's responsibility. Given that Bermuda can have little or no influence on the fate of Haiti, and given that Caricom's own attempts to mediate the revolution there only served to demonstrate its own feebleness as a diplomatic force, Mr. Scott's only aim can have been to cock a snoot at the UK.

Then again, Mr. Scott's musings on whether he should attend the meeting between Caricom and the UK late this year fall into this category as well. He is upset that Bermuda will only be attending the meeting as an "observer" rather than having a full seat at the proceedings.

Never mind that as an overseas territory, Bermuda would not carry any weight in talks between sovereign nations. And never mind that if Mr. Scott really wanted to say something, he could. It is worth noting that he was granted "full privileges" at the Caricom meeting, but never said a word.

Even the storm in a teapot over the Premier's car being allowed to collect him from the plane, saving him the inconvenience and "indignity" of passing through the Airport terminal, falls into this category. If the Governor refused, he would be "humiliating" the Bermuda Government.

None of these fights are important enough in and of themselves to make a cogent argument for Independence. But if Mr. Scott can create enough of these incidents, he will create an atmosphere of suspicion and dislike.

Turning Britain's benign and friendly stewardship of Bermuda into something sinister is essential for pro-Independence activists because there are so few other genuine and tangible arguments that can be made in favour of Bermuda going it alone.