In the first instalment of this series, we explored the erosion of democratic principles in Bermuda. Next, over two parts, we delve into a key component of that erosion: removing dissenting voices and the Opposition.

Dissenting voices?

Two abrupt ministerial departures in 2022 shocked Bermuda's political environment, raising questions about governance and transparency. Unfortunately for Bermuda, those questions remain relevant today. The first shock came when finance minister Curtis Dickinson resigned a mere 12 days before the annual budget, leaving the government front bench during one of its most critical periods. His departure came eight days after the resignation of Carika Weldon, a brilliant Bermudian biochemist who returned exclusively to serve as a science adviser to the Government during the pandemic. The public speculated that the former finance minister's resignation was related to the Gencom/Fairmont Southampton deal.

In response, David Burt, the Premier, said that he didn’t think it was “accurate to say”. The picture became clearer 39 days later when Dickinson addressed the House of Assembly, citing his opposition to the “quantum and form of government support of the redevelopment of Southampton Princess”. His statement effectively contradicted the Premier’s earlier dismissal, suggesting either a deliberate mischaracterisation or a significant communication breakdown at the highest levels of government. In our opinion, the latter is most likely. The second shock, from former national security minister Renée Ming's departure, was even more opaque. Ming herself cited “many reasons” for her resignation, while the Premier offered a markedly different account, claiming he had “invited the Governor to revoke Ming’s appointment” after learning she intended to resign. The conflicting narratives left the public with more questions than answers about the true nature of her exit.

Both departures represented significant losses for Bermuda’s governance. Dickinson and Ming had established reputations, grassroots connections and something Bermudians dearly miss from politicians — integrity. Their exits not only deprived the Government of experienced leadership but also highlighted underlying tensions within the administration that may have broader implications for effective governance. The twin resignations underscore the delicate balance between political loyalty and principled leadership in small jurisdictions such as Bermuda, where individual departures can have outsized impacts on both policy and public confidence.

This method of consolidating power by removing internal challengers is common in autocratic playbooks. In a 2019 analysis, Shelley Inglis noted that modern authoritarians often begin by extending executive power and reducing institutions or individuals that might check them or circumvent power. One key and early step is to “repress dissent”, silencing or expelling those who could hold the leader accountable. It is our opinion that this is happening in Bermuda. It seems that the Premier has tightened his grip on the ruling party by sidelining independent voices within it. Firing a minister who questions you, or driving out a finance chief who dares to differ, strengthens one leader’s power while weakening the democratic principle of internal debate and pluralistic representation. The end result is a part which appears publicly unified because those who disagree are expelled or deliberately sidelined.

Delegitimising the Official Opposition

Crushing dissent within the governing party is only one part of the strategy. Equally troubling is the Premier’s relentless delegitimisation of the Official Opposition. In rhetoric and action, he and his allies have portrayed the One Bermuda Alliance — Bermuda’s elected opposition party — not as a legitimate political contender with alternative ideas, but as an enemy of the people. Burt has gone so far as to question the patriotism of opposition figures and supporters, at times branding the OBA as essentially “un-Bermudian” in its interests and actions. While political insults are nothing new, this line of attack strikes at the heart of the OBA’s legitimacy — it suggests that opposing the Progressive Labour government is tantamount to betraying Bermuda.

Consider the Premier’s stance during the recent election campaign. At a rally on the eve of the 2025 election, Burt pointedly excluded the OBA from any post-election co-operation, even as he spoke of unity with others. “On Wednesday, there will not be an FDM government or a government of independents,” he told voters — it would be either the PLP or the OBA (“Burt makes post-election pledge to fringe groups” The Royal Gazette).

He then pledged to reach out to third-party and independent candidates if the PLP won, “to discuss their ideas and how we can work together for Bermuda”, but notably did not extend that olive branch to the OBA.

The message was clear: in the Premier’s eyes, the OBA was beyond the pale, unworthy of inclusion even in talk of national unity. Burt drove the point home by warning that “a vote for the FDM or an independent candidate or staying at home could well result in an OBA government, and that is something you will have to live with for five long years”.

In other words, any vote that is not for the PLP helps the “un-Bermudian” bogeyman – the OBA – to take power. This is classic delegitimisation: portray your main opponent as a disastrous choice, a threat to the nation, effectively painting them as an illegitimate option.

The irony is that while the PLP leadership wraps itself in a “Bermudians first” mantra, some of its own policies undercut that nationalist posture. Nowhere is this contradiction clearer than in the saga of the 60:40 ownership rule. For decades, Bermuda law required local companies to be at least 60 per cent owned by Bermudians — a protection for Bermudian economic power. The PLP long presented itself as the guardian of such rules. Yet once in power, Burt’s government flipped that formula. In 2018, under Burt, the longstanding 60:40 rule was effectively turned into a 40:60 rule, allowing foreign investors to own up to 60 per cent of Bermudian businesses (“Putting Bermudians first betrayed by relaxation of 60:40”, Vic Ball op-ed, The Royal Gazette).

Burt himself acknowledged the old rule was “the ultimate in protectionism” and argued that relaxing it would attract foreign capital. Whether or not that bet pays off, it starkly contradicts the PLP’s nationalist messaging. The same PLP that labels the Opposition “un-Bermudian” for allegedly favouring outsiders literally changed the law to give outsiders a greater stake in Bermuda’s economy.

Even PLP insiders have admitted the dissonance — one PLP senator called the 60:40 flip a “contradiction” between what the Government says and what it does. This hypocrisy undermines the Premier’s rhetoric: if putting Bermudians first is the standard of patriotism, the PLP has betrayed it by its own deeds.

• Taj Donville-Outerbridge and Tierrai Tull represent Bermuda Youth Connect. Taj is an award-winning Bermudian human rights activist, writer and student studying a double masters of public administration and global affairs at the London School of Economics and Political Science. He also has a decade of involvement in Bermuda’s political system under his belt. He can be reached via Instagram @_king.taj_ and e-mail at tdonvilleouterbridge@yahoo.com. Tierrai is the founder of Bermuda Youth Connect, studying at Oxford in the Department of Politics and International Relations on the Rhodes Scholarship