Shadow Attorney General Mark Pettingill said he could not vote for a motion he believed was instigated by some PLP members when they themselves voted against it.

Speaking to The Royal Gazette yesterday, Mr. Pettingill explained his decision to abstain.

"Well, I did vote. I voted. I started in the House and I abstained in the face of the House. I think at this stage my own colleagues don't understand."

Mr. Pettingill said he couldn't vote for the motion because of the way it was worded and said he know it would lose.

"The motion was initially not drafted by me as Shadow Attorney General or any other lawyers. It was instigated by PLP dissidence that wanted to get rid of their Premier and this was the way to go. The motion was a constitutional motion that in my view wasn't going to achieve what they wanted it to.

"I advised that the motion had to be at least amended or a motion of censure, the original idea."

He explained the Parliament, or a part, can have a motion for censure against the Premier.

He also said the UBP has put up motions of censure in the past. And there was an amendment to the original motion drafted but Speaker of the House, Stanley Lowe, wouldn't allow it in.

"The speaker started the whole debate and wasn't allowing our motion to continue and wasn't allowing any amendments. He said he had drafted a motion. He drafted a censure. That in my view watered down the motion and the amended motion."

He continued: "When it was amended, it was a motion against the Government on the face of it. Everybody thinks there was a motion debated, let's get rid of Ewart Brown motion. They're wrong.

"Then the speaker, I think, offered a recess to go away and discuss it. I was advising let's take a recess and discuss this. But sure enough, we launched into the debate."

June 11 saw the arrival of four ethnic UIghurs which as sparked much debate all across the Island.

In the House of Assembly, Opposition Leader Kim Swan put a motion of no confidence against the Government led by Dr. Brown.

The motion failed after a 14-hour debate in the House that lasted from Friday afternoon until 5 a.m. on Saturday.

Mr. Pettingill said the PLP MPs knew the motion wasn't about the Government but voted against it anyway.

"When I made my speech, I said quite openly that this is a motion, I believe, was instigated by some PLP members. It transpired that they obviously realised that the motion as drafted was against the Government and my party saw that as well. So by the time the vote got to me, it was lost. It was over. I abstained."

Mr. Pettingill explained that as the Shadow Attorney General he is often asked to look over legislation because of this legal expertise and has no problem giving the government advice.

"I advised that the motion needed to be amended and my party accepted that and wanted to amend it."

Mr. Pettingill said he hoped his supporters and UBP supporters understood why he voted how he did because he couldn't be hypocritical.

The lawyer said he didn't plan to vote against it from the beginning. He explained he saw how things were going and realised it would fail with or without his vote.

He maintained that he and Darius Tucker, who wasn't present during the vote, did not decide together not to support the motion.

"People marched on Cabinet, on Parliament. And it is an embarrassment to me that a lot of these people didn't really get what the whole process was, that's being felt. They wanted the debate to be about his premiership and vote him out.

Mr. Pettingill also spoke about the protests.

"I have this question. Why is it that the overwhelming majority of marchers were white? The overwhelming amount of people that sat up in the House were black. And to my mind, what group was focused on the process?

"My hope is that we get as many people out that are prepared for [a] march and yell 'Up with peace' that were there to yell 'Up with Brown'. Whites and blacks with the same motivation of unity."

Asked about any disciplinary procedures that could arise as a result of his abstaining from the vote, Mr. Pettingill said as Caucus chairman for the UBP, Leader Kim Swan would have to go through him to set up a disciplinary hearing.

He said Mr. Swan was welcome to come to him to set up whatever he thought was best if disciplinary actions were needed.

He also said he had heard that Mr. Swan and UBP member Jeff Sousa had gone on the radio to discuss action to take against him and Mr. Tucker but no one had spoken to him.

Speaking about party extremists, Mr. Pettingill said: "So the PLP extremist basically want to say it's humanitarian so we can ignore the Constitution. I am not about to be party to that. If that means that I have to stick with my own principles and integrity as a lawyer than I am afraid I'll have to do that.

"Both groups contain their extremists with extreme views. Both parties have their extremists that do nothing to enhance the unity of this country."

Asked if he planned to stay in the party, Mr. Pettingill said he wasn't planning to leave and wouldn't be crossing to the PLP.

"The question is does the party want to keep me? I am a man of the United Bermuda Party. I have been an open advocate for change in the United Bermuda Party. I know people continue to push for change and I am one of those people. I think I am a reformist."

He continued: "I am hoping that things will change for the UBP and the country. I don't think the PLP is well-served by extremists and I don't think the UBP is well-served by extremists.

"Family comes first, Bermuda comes second and the UBP is way down the line."

l See also story – page 10