The Progressive Labour Party decided to play down the issue of independence to avoid giving voters the opportunity to express themselves, a former Environment Minister and MP told a lecture last night.

In his speech, held as part of a lecture series by the Foundation for Bermuda Studies at the Bermuda College, PLP party stalwart Arthur Hodgson revealed how the PLP first began to address the independence issue under the leadership of late party leader, Frederick Wade.

“We knew that most Bermudians were not in favour of independence and of far greater concern, half of our supporters were not in favour of independence,” said Mr. Hodgson.

Mr. Hodgson, who is the chairman of the organisation, told the dozen audience members including media and members of the Island's legal and academic community, that during strategy discussions, the party decided to play down the issue of independence and decided to oppose any policy that would give voters an opportunity to express their opinions. “What we had hoped was that the party could win power and introduce independence in spite of the electorate,” he said.

The thinking at the time was that the people did not know what was good for them and should not be asked for their input, he said.

“We realised that many of our supporters were not for it, so we decided at the time the best thing was not to ask them.”

Mr. Hodgson reflected how the topic had been put in the spotlight by Bermudian politicians during the 1960s, a time of social upheaval in Bermuda. Discussing independence was not seen to be a beneficial role for the party to take; last night Mr. Hodgson questioned whether or not this remained a “consistent philosophy” in 2004.

In his speech Mr. Hodgson gave an extensive analysis of how to integrate moral principles and good governance and the obligation of politicians to make up the rules by which we govern our lives and the role of religion in determining our perspective of political issues. The role of the constitution in a democratic society and what would or would not change if in the constitution if Bermuda became independent was also a topic of discussion.

Fellow panellist, Justice Ian Kawaley spoke about upholding the structure of the constitution and making the constitution work for the benefit of Bermuda from a historical context.

During his speech Mr. Kawaley said independence would not distort the rules of the constitution. “In Bermuda there will be people to put forward ideas of the evolution of the constitution,” he said.

When asked about the connection between national sovereignty and human rights, Mr. Kawaley said there was not necessarily an intimate connection between the two since countries with a record of human rights abuses often fail to put a stop to injustices after achieving sovereignty.

When another audience member asked how a referendum would be conducted differently than a poll, Mr. Kawaley said unless Government passes a specific law which refers to the referendum as binding, there is no specific law which requires Government that says the results must be followed.

“A referendum is a tool in a democratic society where the Government agrees to follow the people's views.”