Bermuda has been plunged into another controversy concerning freedom of speech and the rights and restrictions on non-Bermudians.

This is a difficult issue, especially in a diverse society where racism remains a highly sensitive problem. The problem is heightened when the large majority of non-Bermudians are white.

That places a demand on non-Bermudians to be sensitive to their surroundings, to the Island’s history and to be cognisant that they are guests in someone else’s country. Most non-Bermudians are all of these things, but there are always exceptions.

The question that arises is when a non-Bermudian says something that is offensive to the community at large, what rights of censure does the community have, and what rights does the non-Bermudian have?

These controversies almost always concern an expatriate — usually white — making a remark about black Bermudians. It would be interesting to see what happened if a black expatriate, for example, made an insulting or offensive comment about white Bermudians.

Nonetheless, the question arises: Does the Government have the right to deport someone from the Island if he or she makes a derogatory comment about Bermudians, or does the expatriate, who is covered while on the Island by the same constitutional protections Bermudians take for granted, have the freedom to make such remarks, no matter how offensive?

It must be remembered that freedom of speech is the freedom to make remarks that are unpopular, not comments that are generally well received. If the latter situation was the case, there would be no need for a constitutional safeguard.

It may well also be that an employer has broader rights to fire or withdraw a work permit than the Department of Immigration does, given that employment contracts can be more tightly drawn.

Government demonstrated this quite nicely when it sacked a non-Bermudian doctor for having the temerity to criticise the closure of the Medical Clinic, a decision which shocked many, but apparently fell within the Hospitals Board’s rights.

Be that as it may, Bermuda needs to decide if it is the kind of place that tolerates freedom of speech, even if we find the opinions being expressed are repugnant, or if it is happy with policies that punish those who speak rashly or hold views that are contrary to the norm. The latter, so easy to accept at the outset, is a slippery slope. Once expatriates are expelled for holding unpopular views, who will be next?

Errol Williams

One person who understood the importance of freedom of expression better than most was Errol Williams, who died this weekend at an age when he was still realising his full potential as a film maker.

Mr. Williams, a black West Indian who made Bermuda his home, was perhaps the leading light in a small but growing coterie of local filmmakers who have been developing a part of Bermuda’s culture that has long been neglected.

Mr. Williams will no doubt be best remembered for “When Voices Rise”, which told the story of the Theatre Boycott of 1959 which brought about the destruction of segregation in Bermuda. A loose sequel, “Walking on a Sea of Glass”, traced the tumultuous life of Kingsley Tweed, a prime spokesman for the Boycott who later exiled himself from Bermuda, and Mr. Williams examined the career of the first black player in the National Hockey League, “Echoes In The Rink: The Willie O’Ree Story”.

All of Mr. Williams’ films told, in one way or another, stories of marginalised people who triumphed over adversity and enriched the black experience. The next production was to be a history of the Bermuda Industrial Union, which, to some extent, would have explored the same theme.

Film as a vehicle of expression can be tremendously powerful and enables the audience to go on a journey with the filmmaker. Mr. Williams’ films are his legacy to Bermuda and it is a tragedy that we will not have the opportunity to see where he was going to take us next.