The absence of Her Majesty the Queen from our 400th Anniversary celebrations seemed to get more publicity in England than it did here.

Bermudians do need to understand, though, that Dr. Brown's agreement to give safe haven to Guantánamo Bay prisoners without consulting with the British Government put paid to well-advanced plans for a Royal visit to mark the occasion.

The Queen would have been present at the celebrations in St George's on July 29 to tell us in person how proud she was of our achievements over the years since our accidental discovery.

The Cabinet Office isn't commenting, of course, but it's a fair guess that she might have taken part in some of the Cup Match festivities as well. As it happens, given the unfortunate violence at Cup Match it is just as well she did not attend the game.

But as James Bone, the London Times New York correspondent wrote last week: "The Queen is skipping today's celebrations of the 400th anniversary of the settlement of Britain's oldest colony after a row with the island's pro-independence leader."

Given that polls indicate almost 75 percent of the electorate are for retaining our links with Britain, a sizeable majority probably would have, at the very least, respected a visit by our Queen. Dr Brown's unconstitutional debacle can be thanked for the visit cancellation.

Dr. Brown has said, publicly, that he didn't believe that he needed to consult the British. If you believe that story, then you should beware of men selling bridges. The idea that the Premier of our country, especially a man as intelligent as Dr. Brown obviously is, and especially a man who makes no secret of his devotion to Independence, would not be familiar with the terms of the Bermuda Constitution, is absolutely ludicrous and frankly out of the question.

Diplomacy does demand of a person who makes an international blunder as large and as egregious as Dr. Brown's that he explain himself in some way, but there is surely no one in the world gullible enough to believe it was anything more than his idea of a little white lie. Perhaps he felt he had to mislead us?

I think Dr Brown knows perfectly well what the terms of the Constitution are. I think he quite deliberately ignored them, hence his apparent failure to seek legal advice from his own Attorney General.

There were most likely two things on his mind, neither of which were humanitarian concerns (the hiring of Art Collins who suggested the whole issue to the Premier in the first place has shown that "humanitarian concerns" were not at the top of the agenda).

First, I think he wanted to try to put the Obama Administration in our debt – a quid pro quo. That's the obvious reason, and it is one with which I take no issue (save for the way in which the Premier secretly made the under the table deal in the first place). However, in my view there was a second, much less obvious reason.

I think he wanted to do something that would cause the UK Government to be angry with us, and to punish all of us for his transgression.

I think Dr Brown felt that Britain would reveal itself as the evil, whip-cracking colonial master he seems to believe it is, and he felt that he could use that dropping of the veil, as it were, to persuade Bermudians to support Independence. Some of his vocal and ardent supporters have said as much.

Two things interfered with this. The first was that our Governor, Sir Richard Gozney, behaved with great restraint.

He was plainly dismayed and angry, but he expressed those feelings in a dignified and appropriate way. It was clear he was not going to march to Dr Brown's tune.

The second was that the Bermuda public reacted much more strongly to what had been done than Dr. Brown expected.

I think he had no idea that the man in the street put so much stock in principled behaviour. Perhaps principle is Dr. Brown's Achilles heel?

Michael Fahy is an Opposition United Bermuda Party senator