history'' amid a row over the timing of a TV head-to-head between Premier Pamela Gordon and the PLP chief.

Ms Smith -- who yesterday repeated in a press release that there would be no confrontation without an election date being set -- insisted when Ms Gordon threw down the gauntlet on June 23 "my response at that time'' was "no debate without a date.'' But last night United Bermuda Party campaign chairman Mike Winfield, who headed the Government side's negotiating team to set up the contest, said: "The Opposition leader's response is inaccurate.

"She responded favourably to a debate to begin with and only came up with a trite slogan almost two weeks afterwards.

"They are attempting to rewrite history -- it would be nice if the Opposition stuck to the truth.'' And Ms Gordon added: "After accepting my invitation, Ms Smith reversed herself and said no.'' She insisted: "It was in the public interest for the debate to be held as far in advance of the election as possible. This would have given every Bermudian the maximum amount of time to carefully weigh the important issues and positions to be decided on Election day.'' Ms Gordon said: "The Opposition should not have deprived voters simply to gain time to prepare for the debate or to indulge in electioneering tactics.

Each party has a primary responsibility to inform the electorate.

"The UBP issued an invitation to debate over three-and-a-half months ago and ever since the PLP has said as little as possible, for as long as possible.'' According to The Royal Gazette reports of the time, Ms Gordon challenged Ms Smith to a debate during a keynote speech on Tuesday, July 23.

The next day, Ms Smith accepted the challenge, promising the names of a PLP delegation to determine the venue, date and format.

And she added there ought to be two debates -- one Government's record to date and another on the Island's future, a challenge Ms Gordon accepted.

PLP campaign committee chairman Calvin Smith in a story printed on July 1 still insisted the PLP would take part in a debate "as soon as possible.'' But he said a two-week time frame suggested by Mr. Winfield was unlikely to be acceptable to PLP chiefs.

The next day, Ms Smith said the PLP would not take part in a debate until the General Election was called -- nine days after the initial challenge and the first time the two had been linked.

And that raised the temperature between the two sides with Mr. Winfield accusing the PLP of "running away'' from the challenge.

Campaign boss Mr. Smith also rejected the proposed format of a one-hour TV studio clash, insisting on a three-hour "town hall'' style contest with public participation.

Neither Ms Smith or the official spokesman for the PLP could be contacted for comment yesterday.

The PLP cancelled a planned press conference yesterday -- which may have been scheduled amid inaccurate TV and radio speculation that Ms Gordon would name the day for the election after Cabinet met in the morning.

It is understood Mr. Smith laid out conditions for the two debates in a letter to Mr. Winfield.

These included two, two-hour debates to be held within seven days of each other, the last a week before Election day.

Other PLP conditions include the Premier and Ms Smith being given ten minutes each, with an additional three minutes each to knock the other's arguments.

But Ms Gordon said the UBP was sticking to its original TV debate suggestion.

And she added: "This debate will not be a political rally or an opportunity to fill a hall. We've already proved we could do that.

"This about `leader to leader' not `crowd to crowd.' This is about substance.

This is about our future and the serious challenges we face in the years ahead.'' Jennifer Smith