If Senator Burch is a 'PR train wreck in slow motion' surely Darius Tucker must be a 'PR kid playing with a hand grenade'.  In an interview with Mr. Tucker regarding whether he'd try to join the breakaway UBP group The Royal Gazette suggests "Mr. Tucker said he would wait to see more details before deciding whether he wanted to join them".  Mr. Tucker seems to be thinking that he would be welcome amongst any party.  This while his performance during his nonsensical actions during and post the no confidence vote makes it hard to believe.  From the perspective of many Mr. Tucker's days in politics are numbered and it would be political suicide for any group to accept an individual into their midst who could so badly botch his public image in such a short span of time.

Yet it continues.  What is Mr. Tucker talking about with regards to the UBP?

"As I have said before, the United Bermuda Party has served the Country well, they have brought the Country this far, but the Country does not want a white Government. That's just the way the Country is right now. They don't want a white Government so the United Bermuda Party can't be Government any more. People interested in politics need to make themselves viable to serve."

What is Mr. Tucker implying?  That the UBP as the party representative of the white vote has no chance?  That the UBP with white members has no chance?  That the UBP with white MPs has no chance?  Or is it that in Bermuda today the color of your skin dictates whether you have a place in poltics?  What do white people interested in politics do to make themselves viable?  Paint themselves black?  He is simply unclear and confusing.  Perhaps people want a government they can trust and it has less to do with skin color?  

"The Country doesn't want the United Bermuda Party to be the Government. The reports that the UBP has commissioned has told them that. They have paid money for reports but they are not listening to the reports. They haven't even given it a good opportunity to reshape and rebrand and give it one good shot because they didn't get committed to change."

What in the world is Mr. Tucker saying?  First it was that the people don't want a white government, now it's that the UBP can't be government then he turns around and says that the UBP didn't take the opportunity to rebrand and isn't commited to change.  Rebrand how?  A new name doesn't change white support for the UBP, nor does it change the white members or MPs.  If the people don't want a white government, what does a new name do?  Alternatively we've recieved accounts that these reports suggested the UBP needed more black surrogates.  Is this what Mr. Tucker is advocating?  More black MPs to to act as puppets to white string pullers?  Should it be all black faces in the forefront of a party with largely white support?  Does that make for a non-white government that would make the UBP something the people would want as government?  What is it?

The issue is that Mr. Tucker makes about as much sense now a he did when he resigned: none.  Words are coming out of his mouth but they aren't adding up to anything coherent.  Mr. Tucker seems to claim the country doesn't want the the UBP in government because they'd be a white government but still thinks they should be rebranding and giving it a shot without clarifying what kind of rebranding will solve the problem.  It would seem Mr. Tucker agrees with the need for more puppets but who really knows.  Sure it'd put white [typo] black faces up front but it would make the UBP trusted even less.  Indeed, it wasn't race that got the UBP into this predicament, it was trust and the nacent abuse of it.  Mr. Tucker's rather odd and confusing quasi pondering about race aside.

Would someone please bang the gong already and get him off the stage?

While I’ve made it quite clear that in my belief the best thing for Bermuda’s future would be for the UBP to disband into independents there are likely still things I believe the UBP could do to salvage itself.  Besides, there are many PLP supporters out there who are now rooting for a maintained weak opposition that can keep their own party unaccountable and we certainly can’t disappoint them.

The UBP needs to pursue the fundamental change that the community has been calling for.  No, not a name change and definitely not more token puppets.  Number one the UBP needs to be the change it talks about.  Number two the UBP needs to stop hiring clueless consultants. 

At its core people have an issue with trust and the suggestion that blacks are pushed to the forefront as puppets is a huge issue of contention for people.  Why would it make any sense to hire and listen to people who would produce a report suggesting that you need to get more puppets, the exact thing people don’t trust you for?

[Senator Dunkley] admits the party had employed tokenism in the past, and the UBP has long faced allegations of fielding black candidates and hiding the fact the string-pullers behind the scenes are white.

This label refuses to go away, and a review by consultants carried out after the election defeat was published this week on ZBM, in which advisers told the party they needed more "black surrogates". (via the RG)

Here’s a suggestion:  solve this problem.  How do you do so?  By doing the very thing you’ve been saying the government needs to do more of: being transparent.  The UBP needs to make itself as open as possible.  It needs to make candidate and party executive selection as open and transparent as possible.  It needs to make meetings as transparent as possible.  It should be the people who choose the candidates and party executives and it should be made obvious by making it an open election process that chooses the best candidates based on numerous factors.  Anything that clearly shows the people chose these candidates and not some clique of white powerbrokers will improve things. 

Want to counter ‘puppet’ ads?  Create an ad where the individuals in question come out to claim “I’m a puppet” only to zoom the camera out to show a wide range of their constituents and suggest “and it’s my constituents who pull my strings” depicting constituents pulling strings attached to the chosen representative.  Creatively target this negative stigma and fight it.  Earn the people’s trust by making it clear that a white clique aren’t the ones behind the scenes pulling strings and you’re truly there serving the community.

The biggest problem the UBP has is that few trust them.  Few trust the PLP either it is just that we trust the UBP less.  The PLP once talked about good governance and all the great things they were going to do when they finally made it to power and once they did, whoops, all of that disappeared.  Thus, why would anyone trust the UBP saying the same things?  What happens when you’re elected?  What stops you from up and deciding that maybe good governance is about as important as the PLP thinks it is.  The UBP needs to be the change it preaches.

Be the change.  If the UBP wants to talk about good governance, transparency and decency then it has to do more than preach about how things could be.  The UBP needs to take a hard look at the change it wants to see in government and make that change happen within itself.  It needs to make absolutely everything it possibly can transparent and open to the public.  It needs to prove that the public can have more of a say by giving the public more of a say.  It needs to be more democratic, it needs to embrace direct democratic processes and empower the people.  It needs to regain the trust of the people.  It needs to be the change so people can see the change before we can accept that the UBP is the kind of change we’ve been waiting for.

Be the change.  That or disband into independents.  Your choice. (I vote independents)

A large thus far unanswered question that lingers and will likely make or break this initiative is how does this new group intend to differentiate themselves in a way that they can be defined as different from the incumbent and its foe?  Indeed a “manifesto of equal opportunity, social justice, security and fiscal conservatism” is little different from the line these individuals toed amongst their former colleagues. 

Bermuda needs something radically different.  It needs a new party that won’t just preach transparency and good governance only to whistle a different tune once they get a taste of power.  The very principles that a party intends to run our island by need to reverberate in the very foundation of the party itself. 

The announcement that six individuals have resigned from the UBP with the intention of forming their own party doesn’t thus far show great evidence of this having been a well planned and calculated action.  From what this commentator has witnessed public opinion and support can be very fickle which could serve as a thorn in the side of these individuals of change. 

Undoubtedly the prospect of a new party will rally a great many who are desperate for change but if the height of excitement and momentum is not maintained the movement can fizzle quite rapidly as it has in the past for the likes of the All Bermuda Congress, the National Liberal and the Bermuda Democratic Party.  These individuals risk following in the footsteps of those who tried a similar course before them and failed.

It is the belief of this writer that the root of any successful initiative towards a new party in Bermuda requires intricate planning and careful calculation of every move long before it is made.  The reason being that in undertaking such an initiative you face the greatest force of uncertainty ever known and charging ahead blindly is rarely a useful course of action when faced with uncertainty.

Indeed, many questions arise as to what we shall face in the coming months, questions these individuals will need to have considered and adequately prepared for.  The speculation already rises that Premier Brown will call a snap election to capitalize on this rift and strengthen his own position.  For a party suggested to form in the new year how does it propose to stand up to challenges that come before then?  What other potential scenarios could arise between now and then and how will they answer?

The Royal Gazette is reporting the fragmentation of the UBP in the form of 6 prominent members, 3 being Members of Parliament, quitting to form a new party.  What will come of this no one can know but what is for certain is that it will be interesting times indeed.

The split of the UBP at this time poses interesting possibilities.  For one, we could see Premier Brown move to call a snap election to capitalize on the situation.  This is an action some have considered a possibility regardless considering the upcoming Progressive Labour Party constitutional conference at which the Premier’s opponents are due to make their objections known.  This however would require Premier Brown to wield a considerable position of strength as such a move could backfire.

Something worth considering is the knowledge that the Official Opposition’s strength has now been reduced to 9 Members of Parliament.  This number happens to be less than half of the PLP’s 22 seats in parliament and raises some interesting possibilities to ponder.  One example is that PLP rebels would only need to control the majority of PLP seats to be the governing party if a split occurred.  Whether that is a likely possibility is certainly up for debate.

Does the United Bermuda Party realize how ridiculous they make themselves look when Opposition Leader Kim Swan is suggested to have made comments like the low voter turnout was a vote of no confidence in Premier Ewart Brown's Government?  If low voter turnout is a benchmark of confidence then perhaps the opposition leader should more carefully examine the numbers and take a long hard look in the mirror.  Indeed the percentage of those who did turn out to support the UBP declined in comparison to the last election and if anything is a vote of no confidence in the UBP and its present leader.

Rummy helped me realize in my comments that I may take for granted my understanding of minority governments due to having seen it in the Canadian political system so I thought I’d present a simple explanation.

Put simply a minority government is one where the incumbent governing party does not control the majority of the overall number of seats in parliament.

To illustrate this let us examine what we have today, which could be considered a majority government.

At present we have 36 MPs. 22 are PLP, 12 UBP and 2 independent. This means the PLP have the majority and thus can pass anything they like in Parliament assuming PLP members toe the party line.

A minority government would be a government where the PLP for example would still be the incumbent but would not control the majority of seats.  Let us suggest that a new party had arisen last election and the results came out as 17 PLP, 13 UBP, and 6 for party X. This would mean that the PLP does not control the majority of the seats and thus would have to win support of either UBP members or members of party X to pass any law in parliament.

This kind of restriction means that the incumbent is now held accountable as they are unable to pass laws they cannot get support from either of the two oppositions.  Subsequently they are at risk of being called back to an election if the two oppositions agree on a vote of no confidence.

This kind of government promotes compromise and reduces the arrogance seen of majority governments because in order to succeed they must earn their support rather than assume it and take it forgranted.  It means we would see a return of issues being properly debated and fairer stances being undertaken.  Thus we end up with a stronger government because it is forced to be accountable and transparent.

We have already seen examples of a minority government in action when rebel MPs in the PLP stood against Premier Brown’s ridiculous attempt to pass his gambling law.  Since he did not control the majority of MPs he was unsuccessful and has subsequently had to reign in his overt ways in favor of greater compromise or he shall be held at a stalemate unable to accomplish anything.  It is this that we need to see continue and could likely shall if we saw a new party arise with the goal of pursuing a minority government.