on the Green Paper on Independence will have been struck by one overwhelming fact. The general standard of debate has been "poorer than poor''.

With a few exceptions like the Hon. Jerome Dill, the Hon. Pamela Gordon and Mr. David Dodwell, who were clearly prepared for the debate, the general level was embarrassing for a Country with high standards. Some of the older members like Mr. Walter Roberts demonstrated that years of service have not been a learning experience. At one point the Rev. Trevor Woolridge spoke for 35 minutes without saying one single thing. Late on Wednesday afternoon the Premier's tired words about his daughter's passport were saddening. His failure to address the issues made the disarray clear.

Records of this debate may well take on great historical significance and will only demonstrate how poorly both the thinking and the standards of Bermudians were represented in the House of Assembly on March 22, 1995.

Bermudians had a right to expect some preparation, a little insight, perhaps some well prepared and well reasoned speeches, maybe even something statesmanlike from the members on this milestone issue. Instead, if it is possible, the standard of debate was lower than usual.

Part of the problem was the confusion caused by the gross mismanagement of the whole Independence issue. Independence was raised at a time when the ruling party had been weakened by a very close Election. But much more than that, Independence as a national issue appeared out of nowhere at a time when Bermuda was unsettled politically as a result of the election, suffering from the uncertainty of bases closures, still recovering from the recession, plagued by sluggish tourism and undergoing grave debates about race. That led to serious splits in the ruling party which is what happens when a party defies the wishes of its followers. Even the splits were not representative of the extent of the concern of the people. The Members of the House gave little indication of any understanding of how the Country felt or of the reactions to the issue in the Country.

The very debate, never mind the possibility of Independence, seriously affected the economy and the social fabric of Bermuda. It frightened investors, local and foreign, and it encouraged rebels. Yet otherwise serious Members of the House busily denied these facts. Do they live in this community? The Opposition was caught in a classic dilemma. In favour of Independence, it opposed a referendum to decide Independence. That may seem strange to sensible people but it came about because the Opposition preferred the less controlled arena of a General Election where it could throw in other issues along with Independence.

This includes one constitutional "reform'' -- the replacement of parish-based dual constituencies with supposedly proportional single seat districts -- as a precondition of going Independent, despite the fact that it has nothing to do with the issue. But it does allow the PLP to use it as an excuse for election defeat, even though it has never won a majority of the votes in an election.

This muddying of the waters appeared to have occurred because the PLP knew that a good many of its followers do not support Independence and may have felt they would vote against it in a clear-cut choice at a referendum but would follow the party if there were multiple issues. Such are the contradictions in politics.