Fully Transparent

My cousin made a brilliant remark and observation the other night.  You see, Bermuda political parties have this rather odd quirk about them that they expect you to join the party to actually understand what they're about.  They're not interested in spreading their information and philosophy in the public realm and expect you to join on the basis of who the party is before you get to appreciate what they stand for.  My cousin's solution?  He's going to join all 3 of them.

Bermuda politics is frankly a bit ridiculous.  Look over to Jonathan Starling's Catch a Fire blog and you can often find the claims of the PLP commenters there that he's wrong to be relying on information publicly available and should be seeking out the people in the know and having personal conversations with them to 'educate' himself on the truth.  Often times people are accused of relying on information available in the public domain which is deemed as false and inaccurate and yet no alternative exists except for the much suggested "join the party so you can be properly informed".  It isn't just limited to the PLP, it seems like all parties act in this manner.

While there was hope that Bermuda's newest party the Bermuda Democratic Alliance would be different, in this regard they seem to be taking a similar tack.  Upon commenting on the lack of information available for public consumption the overwhelming response from party supporters was that one should join to find out. Why?  Why does one need to join a party to appreciate what they stand for?  It doesn't make any sense. 

An interesting recent example is available on Bermuda is Another World where BDA's defacto representative Full Fullish claims:

Immediately after the party conference we sent out our draft constitution to ALL members for their comment and feed back before ratifing it, all members now have a very active way to not only know how the party works, but has an immediate and direct mechanism for defining those processes.  

This is excellent that they're involving their members but SmokingGun counters and hits it right on the money by claiming that such information should be publicly released if the party truly wants to make new waves in Bermuda politics:

You guys want to be different. Be different. Make it so no-one has to be a "member" before they get a complete and honest understanding of what you stand for. You want people's input, make it easy for them. Don't be afraid to operate in the open from the outset.

This outlines a major point of contention for many sitting on the sidelines with respect to the new party.  The party has been quick to claim that they represent "change" and "a better way" and fundamentally believe in transparency to their core but aren't delivering on the kinds of expectations that people hold.  Many want to see transparency reflected in not only government but also party dealings.  Now admittedly there will always be a need for a small segment of information to be kept under wraps, however every attempt should be made to make as much information as transparent as possible with secretive information being as rare and unnecessary as possible.  Information sent to an entire membership base simply doesn't need to fall under this kind of classification nor does most of the other information related to a party.

It shouldn't be much of a surprise if the legacy parties don't bother to up their transparency but it is a bit of a surprise to not be seeing the kind of change with our newest party.  Many were honestly expecting that it is what was meant by "transparency" and are frankly left disappointed.  As has been said many times on this blog in the past, what we most need to see from those in opposition is for them to be the change, not preach it.  

Comments

comments

This entry was posted in Uncategorized by . Bookmark the permalink.

47 thoughts on “Fully Transparent

  1. Define “opposition” “Change” and “preach”.
    As I have said many times before and I am sure “AP” is watching, you leave everything until the last sentence.
    Thats not a good summation of critical thought and comment.
    The irony is Denis, for the BDA to be “the change” others have to help fill the money jar.
    Gotta run…. nickle here dime there shread the card and give a care…….

  2. Excellent analysis,
    lets not forget it was formed by UBP rebels,who nobody would know if they had not used their party machinery to get elected,
    likewise with “Judas” Jamal,who has belonged to three parties,now finally he’s found the big pay check up E rats
    I seem them as EST,and other cults,
    EST’s founder Werner Erhard (a.k.a. Jack Rosenberg)was jailed over serious complaints about abuses, lawsuits etc

  3. Rummy,
    Honestly I have rarely have a clue what you’re talking about. It is always necessary to talk in riddles that only you truly know the meaning?
    By the way, you do realize that not all Pitcher families are related, even St. David’s ones, right?

  4. The constitution wasn’t finished. A draft went out to the members.
    Chill out. Progress is being made every day… and for the record, I am not involved in it but see as an outsider who attended Saturday night’s event that they are making progress.

  5. Alex,
    What was the reasoning why the draft was kept for members only? Certainly there could have been and it could have been entirely acceptable, however what I’m advocating is that as much as possible should be made transparent with very little being an exception.
    Nobody has to follow what I recommend, hell, show me where either the UBP or PLP has? What I’m suggesting is that many people have trust issues with both the UBP and PLP. The BDA would go a long way in winning more credibility and trust if they went out of their way to make as much as possible public, even drafts and works in progress. If they don’t oh well, but it’ll be their loss.

  6. Riddles make you think.
    And yes I am well aware that all Pitchers are not related. Even as you say in St. Davids.
    Nice piece you penned for BIAW. You seem to have all the answers and diagnosis with regards to politics, parties, and their workings.
    Being an independent and looking from the outside must be your advantage for such thorough insight.
    Anyway, my opinions and we all know how they viewed in a small town.
    Now..too early for rum so I’ll have a beer.

  7. Rummy,
    I certainly don’t have all the answers or even pretend that I do. I have simply spent a fair bit of time studying the topics and have gained insight. Certainly remaining independent has given me a more unique perspective because I haven’t been groomed by the ways and understandings of existing organizations. ie (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0814408834/ref=oss_product)
    When I tried forming a party years ago I learned a lot about organizations and what works and what doesn’t in terms of trying to develop things collaboratively. Namely, without proper structure it’s a lot like trying to herd cats and it’s a huge part of the reason why I failed to gain much momentum.
    Subsequently driven to learn from my mistakes I kept learning, studying and reading up on why some things worked and others didn’t.
    For example much of what I posted on BIAW comes from insights into researching direct democracy. Namely from having read the Europe Initiative And Referendum Institutes book on Direct Democracy (http://www.iri-europe.org/en/publications/guidebooks/) which subsequently comes from having studied the various forms of democracy around the world and found the ones that have had the most successful track record, namely the Swiss one. It’s flourished for over a hundred years when other attempts (California for example) have failed miserably. It’s important to not cast aside the concept on the basis of california’s example and instead spend more time understanding why one worked and one doesn’t.
    However, had I instead of originally trying to strike out on my own took people’s advice and joined the UBP or PLP it is likely that I’d have come up with none of these ideas and concepts. Instead I’d be groomed by their mold and way of thinking, which is inherently what happens when you’re forced to climb the ranks within an organization.
    This is a large reason why I’m so adamant about not joining a party at this point. My cherish my independence as a valued asset because it gives me a unique perspective on things. One day perhaps I’ll be able to apply that perspective for positive change but again for the time being there is strength in remaining on the sidelines.

  8. some really disengenuous critical b.s. here – saturday’s BDA conf. was open to the ENTIRE population – membership was not a criteria – you want to know what they are about? get off yr ass and go find out! (p.s. – i dont think yr cousin will be able to join all parties – criteria for mem. is basically no membership in the other party)

  9. James,
    Sure, the conference was, but the draft constitution isn’t.
    Perhaps you’d better understand based upon the comments I wrote over at BIAW in response to the suggestion that MPs should be recalled if they get less than 55% in an opinion poll comissioned by the party.

    “Every six months pay for an opinion poll and if anyone’s approval rating drops below 55% for more than two periods have them step down?
    Would be wicked different from what we have today.”
    I disagree. People’s standing in the party shouldn’t be dictated by opinion polls. If you really want to be “wicked different” implement a right of recall within the party similar to what you’d implement as government (if you so support recall).
    Essentially if 5% of your registered membership base successfully petitions for a vote to recall one of your members, make such a vote binding in your constitution based upon that petition number and have that vote require a significant majority (60%) support and significant turnout (50%?) to force an MP or party official to step down. Subsequently, put a limit on the duration following an election or a recall attempt that they are exempt from such provisions. Make it reasonably possible to recall an MP but not so easy that people get actively harassed.
    Broadcast this to the people as an example of the kind of recall you intend to implement for all politicians at a government level should you be elected into power. This is an example of what I’m referring to when I suggest “be the change”. Show the people how you’d do it at an island level by modelling it in your party.
    Another thing. Your constitution should not be “set in stone” as one of your MPs suggested in the paper the other day. Take a page from the works of William Penn and his living constitution idea which allows for amendments to be passed to constantly adjust the constitution. It was this idea which was taken and used to form the US constitution. Make amendments ratifiable via a referendum (vote) by the party membership. Also make amendments propositions submittable by the party membership. Follow a similar structure as the recall one for amendment submissions. 5% petition support for an amendment makes it binding to have a referendum, 60% needs to vote in favor with 50%+ turnout. Limit durations which modifications can be resubmitted.
    To make things easier, make it so votes only happen quarterly and that issues can be queued up to be voted in block. So that you don’t overwhelm the membership base but can get decent turnout for a variety of issues.
    Similar moves could be taken to create a living or “people’s” platform to allow you to be constantly evolving your stance based upon membership feedback and control while also buying the benefit of not being bound to a platform if it evolves with your membership. Under a platform model there’s a whole different means to structure feedback control and ratification but I think I’ve covered enough that you get the gist.
    These are reasons why I support SmokingGun’s call to make more info public, even drafts. You benefit from the potential from even greater feedback. Capture thoughts ideas and input from all people and involve all people to your benefit. Give your membership base the power to decide the direction. Ideas should be free and party agnostic, implementation should be the real value party’s offer.

    Source: http://bermudaisanotherworld.org/forum/index.php?topic=2432.90
    Fundamentally I believe transparency can be of huge benefit to a party but many people just don’t appreciate why because of the status quo. If people stopped fighting my views on the basis of being defensive (http://www.instantbrainstorm.com/lizard_brain.html) and really took a moment to freely consider what I’m trying to propose they may well appreciate that I’m not simply trying to critcise for the point of criticising but instead am attempting to share constructive ideas that could greatly benefit the party.
    This is exactly what I reference later in the thread in terms of people sitting on the fence because since the party’s roots are founded in the UBP legacy members are inherently groomed to reject radical new ideas.

    “although I would expect some of the veterans to look like they have seen a ghost if you propose it though”
    That is exactly a concern with this new party. Even though they’re billed as a “new party” they’ve inherited legacy veterans from the UBP, some who also hold seats. Individuals are more likely to be groomed by their previous organization and more hesitant to change from the status quo (eg http://www.instantbrainstorm.com/lizard_brain.html) and since they are inherited as power brokers, they also can have more sway and are more inclined to resist radical new ideas. As nice as it is to have a “new party” it isn’t as guaranteed that the road to getting solid new ideas adopted is any easier than with the existing lot, especially when the inherited power brokers are the ones who most have something to lose.
    This is exactly why many sit on the fence rather than rushing to jump on board. Things were already set and rolling early on before most people were brought into the fold and as such there is even more of a liklihood that positions on how things could be done and structured are more set. The majority of fence sitters would likely rather see evidence of positions and that the old ways don’t hold a ton of power before jumping into the fold to face the same battles that would be faced in trying to change the PLP or UBP. Otherwise, what really makes the new party any different from the old ones if one truly wants to instill “change”?

    This is exactly why I’m not interested in joining BDA at this time. It is just as much effort trying to convince people who get incredibly defensive over relatively simple concepts as it is if I were to try to convince the PLP or the UBP to undertake the same ideas.
    Certainly it’s a “new” party, but many of us are waiting to find out exactly how new before jumping into the fold.

  10. My Lord Denis. Your starting to sound more like Frank Sinatra everyday. ….I did it My Way’.
    A well written post above but I don’t agree with some of your statements, observations.
    It’s not a perfect world, never will be. The Swiss and the Californians are worlds apart. A country and a State are seperate items.
    You want to sit on the fence? Thats fine. You can read, research, diseminate et al all you want. Your no Stuart Hayward nor other. Stuart can be a pain but I give him credit for slipping off the fence and taking the heat and basically attending various meetings involving all sorts of politics from UBP to PLP to what/whom ever.
    You purport to think that being critical and independent will chart your course until you have made up your mind about socalled parties etc. Fine. Thats gonna be a long journey and your missing out on information, agendas, challenging ideas, comments et al if you don’t get involved. Not a soul will hinder your presence at meetings etc.
    Being Independent is greatas Mr. Liberman can tell you. He’s such now because of his attitude.
    Get out to the meetings. Listen, take notes, be exposed to it instead of reading or learning it from the daily rag or on a blog or forum.
    It has become too easy in tis day and age to assume were know it all now because so and so said it on a blog and his ‘ace bouys’ said ‘yah..yah..nail on head..yah right’. These people have agendas and possibly so do the attendees at public meetings whether they be current elected parties/members or whatever.
    As for the BDA? I wish them well as they have taken bold steps after members of the UBP said enough…….
    I have no problem with sitting members of the UBP except the fact that they have wasted my time and the countries by just not taking action and basically critisising . As for the PLP? Good on them for being elected but they have made some serious blunders and the Premier has not set a good example as is well documented.
    It’s great to sit back and read world history and how things have worked for some and not for others by doing stats. Hell….name me a country or dependent that runs well and is in lah lah land…Not a damn one.
    You are whom you are. Your independent in thinking but not of your fellow countrymen and women. Your part of the deal.
    Get out to meetings and become involved. The irony is that you can still sustain your independence/dant and have first hand knowledge.
    My comments are not personal and I do not know you but have heard of you. A great guy with a lot to offer. So, go do it and maintain your independence at the same time. It’s done every day.
    Have a great day and remember…only you can prevent nude pitchers.
    El Rummo.

  11. Rummy,
    Thanks for being more clear in your feedback.
    I actually do get out and attend meetings. I’ve been to ABC meetings, PLP meetings, UBP meetings and would attend BDA meetings. Let along meetings with people interested in forming parties themselves, meetings with people from the press, non-political meetings, etc. Sometimes however you have other commitments. I had a family function that evening and couldn’t attend and don’t feel I should take an insane amount of flak for not making BDA my number one priority, or any meeting for that matter. Sometimes family matters. The invention of the internet means it should be less required to attend and the fact that I went looking for into about what happened on the Sunday morning following says I was interested in finding out and was disappointed that nothing was there.
    Lots of people sometimes can’t or won’t attend meetings and if you want to reach those people you need to do more than just hold a meeting. It’s like a debate I once had with Michael Dunkley when I had a chance to run into him. He was adamant that the way to win an election is on the doorstep. He wasn’t willing to open his gaze and consider that other means have value and ultimately he didn’t win, he lost and lost UBP leadership as a result.
    Sure door to door canvasing is a valid and very valued method but not everyone is home all the time and not everyone wants door to door visits. Some people prefer phone calls, some people prefer meetings, some people prefer the internet. The goal of a party shouldn’t be to attack just one medium but every one possible.
    Is it really necessary we lock ourselves into one way of thinking that this is the only way that’s valid? I haven’t condemned the meetings or suggested that people shouldn’t go, what I’ve suggested is that it shouldn’t be the only means for people to be able to get informed and it shouldn’t be expected that people attend.
    Very simply I believe that if a party truly wants to be successful they shouldn’t put the onus on the individual to come looking for the message and instead do everything they can to get their message out.
    I don’t just preach it, I live it, I “be the change” with regards to getting my message out. Google my name, what comes back? Type in https://www.21square.com to your browser, http://www.dpitcher.com, http://www.denispitcher.com, http://www.dennispitcher.com, they all go to the same place. I occasionally write to the papers and am occasionally quoted in them. I interact with the PLP, UBP and even aim to with BDA. At meetings I attend I usually get up and speak, pushing my message and views. Are they right? Quite possibly not, but are they worth consideration? Yes, all should be.
    ‘Get involved’ can mean many things. I only just finished with the regiment. I was for some time involved with Youth on the Move and have other commitments on the side including teaching kiteboarding on weekends and some evenings and a fairly demanding job with a culture of long hours and hardwork in a very competitive industry where I have to make up more than the time I waste debating symantics on this rather useless blog. This is let alone writing regularly enough to keep putting my message out there.
    I am out there more than most spreading my message, ideas and thoughts while balancing something of a life. Perhaps I’m already “involved”, just not in the way others would most hope.

  12. Hi
    Not trying to beat it to death but – you’re right – no need for drafts to be secret – still its a bit unfair tos ay that the founding members are exUBP so some how its in their DNA to be ” inherently groomed to reject radical new ideas.” – Hell – they ARE the ones who have started something radically new! – not us armchair critics who cant even decide whether we can or cannot put down a $5 bill. – my hats off to them! besides not one of them were in the house prior to this election (i think – maybe sc was) – in any event your point is taken about recalling MP’s but thats really dealing with the minutia at this point not radical thinking at all really – just tinkering at the edges. whether we are PLP UBP BDA UNDECIDED INDEPENDANTS it really doesnt matter – if we were comfortable in our own skin (dont read anything racial in that!) we would welcome anyone with a new idea and the conviction to speak it – have a great day!

  13. Hey Denis,
    Just wanted to expand on the point you raised concerning some of the flak I get from certain PLPers on CAF. Most of the time I do actually know more of what happened than what is in the media, and I can certainly contact the appropriate people to find out more. However, I can’t exactly write posts on the basis of ‘I hear that…’, especially when the people I contact don’t want to be quoted or anything. Most of my criticism of the PLP’s actions at times are more about their failure to utilise the mechanisms at their disposal, namely CITV, the http://www.gov.bm site (for Minesterial press releases) or their own plp.bm site. For a Party that places so much emphasis on defining their opposition they fail to communicate their own image very well and expect people to rely on informal information networks or, by default, the media they so strongly despise. If they took the initiative and gave their side of the story on their own sites (or sites at their disposal) it would make my (and others) lives a helluva lot easier.

  14. James,
    My apologies, I was not intending to imply that that this is an exUBP phenomenon but instead is a factor of all organizations with a basis in cognitive psychology. The link I provided (http://www.instantbrainstorm.com/lizard_brain.html) gives a pretty good laymans interpretation of the cognitive psychology behind it, though admittedly it’s still a rather unexplored field in the grand scheme of things and I’m by no means an expert and have simply done some reading and a decent amount of pondering on the subject.
    What I’ve noted over the years is that people inherently become biased by an organization and the greatest innovation comes from outsiders (ie that book I referenced in the amazon link) though sometimes radical outside innovation is not always the answer (eg, check out the How the might fall book I wrote about recently).
    The regiment was a great example of how individuals can be groomed by an organization. (again, not saying it is a trait of the regiment but instead of organizations). In such a hierarchy you enter the organization with an outside perspective, unique and fresh, potentially full of feedback for how things could (could, not must) be modified to be made better. The issue is that in order to provide any real feedback you have to pay your dues and climb the ranks before you have the power to influence things. The problem is, the longer you spend within the organization the more influenced you become by their ways of doing things. Some things you get more used to and grow more accepting of. The end result is that by the time you reach a position where you’re capable of achieving the change you desired to in the beginning you’re actually quite removed from your original viewpoint and thus don’t end up enacting the kind of change you originally would have. This is why large organizations don’t change very quickly because it’s hard to truly understand the view from the bottom from the perspective of the top if you don’t have the right feedback mechanisms in place.
    In the scheme of the scope of political parties BDA is indeed radically new, however their announced ideas and structure thus far has not been shown to be (yet, perhaps in time it will).
    They aren’t however the first who’ve tried to do something radically new. ABC did it, though failed to gain momentum. So did the NLP. I even tried starting something a few years back but met considerable resistance. Subsequently I’ve put my own time and money into trying to spread my ideas, far more than $5.
    I agree, recall isn’t a radical idea. However the way it is structured can make a very big difference between whether its a success or a failure. On top of that, even though it isn’t a radical idea, it is radical in that neither the PLP or UBP have been willing to actually commit to doing it. Many people have called for it and agree that it should be done and yet BDA has not taken a stance for or against. That is up to them and their members however what I do propose is that in order to convince the people they’re genuine they should be the change they talk about. Namely if they support transparency and things like recall they should make every effort possible to make it a founding element in their party right down to the structure and constitution.
    This is why I suggest that transparency is lacking. Not to say they aren’t making efforts or that they aren’t transparent and people can’t turn up. I’m just giving a different definition of transparency. Indeed, by only sending out their draft to members and ratifying it they lock out valueable opinions they could get from non members.
    Who knows, maybe if they made their draft public, individuals sitting on the fence like me got to provide feedback and their members ratified it with a good chunk of the feedback taken into account it may be enough to rally a significant amount of fence sitters in to their camp.
    However, by making the draft members only they assure that they won’t get our feedback and thus make it less likely that they’ll incorporate the kind of change that would be most likely to actually win us over. Is it possible they will? Sure, however by excluding our feedback they risk alienating our viewpoint and thus if they don’t include our viewpoint how could they really understand it and address it?
    Like you say, right of recall isn’t a radical idea. However I and many others see it as a huge requirement for supporting any party and if BDAs constitution gets set in stone without it, it could well be enough to convince us that BDA isn’t the way to go and to continue looking for other options.

  15. Denis, you wonder why we are where we are today.
    You can talk all the shit you want on this TV screen and put up stats all you want. Dunkley was correct and still is.
    It goes back to what I stated prior. Go too meetings, listen, observe, ingest, digest, regurgitate.
    I have said it before and I will go too my grave ( hang on all you pundits out there) that technoligy will be the ruination of man/womenkind.
    You want me to sit back watch the TV, listen too the radio ( they have have that right) read letters too the editor and the Workers voice and pamphlets left stuck too my windscreen wipers and a flyer from whom/whatever and all will be good?
    Influence is a bitch and it is the top priority of every vendor whether electronic, visual or spoken.
    “Spoken” takes a back seat. You do the math. Thats your forte.
    I just bought a new 46″ Plasma/Smashma TV. I got a 1000+ channels ..HD/HDF/ so what. I don’t watch the damn thing because…(pick a choice or reason)
    Same shit, differant day. I watch the NBC evening news Walter Cronkite and a few snippets of the Summer Ohlympiks in Vancoover.
    You want change? Good on you. Now get the rest of the peoples that are subject to hardships whether retail, hospitality, wholesale, customer service et al to band together.
    It can be done and is being addressed by the BDA in a civil manner.
    BDA? Brown Depletes Accounts. Thats not slander nor libel. Mismanagement maybe……. or whats that word I’m looking for…………accountability..
    Better stop now. This is going all over the world and I ‘the rummy’ would not want ever to deceive you…….

  16. Rummy,
    How was Dunkley correct? In that the only way to win elections is on the doorstep?
    I have a great deal of respect for Dunkley and well as his willingness to put it all on the line for a gamble in the face of incredible odds. We are lucky to have him in politics.
    However, I’m sorry, but if you think the election is only won on the doorstep than you’re mistaken. You may condemn technology but younger generations have wildly embraced it. You’re more likely to win support of the younger generation on facebook and twitter than you are on the doorstep. Each generation has it’s own medium. You talk about TV with a thousand channels, claim you don’t watch it and then list what you do watch. I don’t even have cable, if you put an ad on local TV I won’t see it. If you go door to door, I’m often not even home, you probably won’t catch me. Where you will catch me is here, along with many others. You may condemn technology but we each have our medium and to ignore one in preference of another is to ensure you’re not capturing your full potential audience with your message.
    As Marshall McLuhan coined it “the Medium is the Message” and it has a huge impact on how people perceive information. Every medium has a different impact.
    Honestly, I heard the same arguments for supporting the UBP. Brown is evil, yada yada yada, UBP is our only option. Ultimately it was “be willing to settle for the lesser of two evils”.
    I’m tired of settling for the lesser of evils. I was invited out to one of the original “invite only” shortly after BDA launched. The only prob is that I was they’d follow up with the location and time and they never did. They’ve had another meeting, one which I’ve noted I was unable to attend.
    When they have another, perhaps I’ll attend, however it would be worthwhile if more of their info was made public so I’d be better informed without having had to have turned up.
    I’ve never said I won’t join BDA, PLP, UBP, I’ve simply said at this time they aren’t for me. I’m always open and willing to consider changing my position, but as of yet the evidence for doing so isn’t there and I won’t be pressured into joining any one of them no matter how much you or someone else believes they are the way.

  17. I glanced your reply. I’ll get back later. In fact you answered my comments by saying “Facebook and Twitter” will win elections……………….
    Sad freekin day when that happens but ……………..

  18. Dunkley was correct in all respects along with others who struggled to get us where we are and don’t you forget. Regardless of political affiliation. You’ve done your homework, now apply it. All the articles you have read, researched, documented and presented with regard to history of the fight for equality by Blacks, Portugese, et al in Bermuda is what it is.
    I do not dispute that you, as an individual will not join a “party”. You sit on the fence not I nor many others.
    You keep comming up with this crap about you were not available too attend, family matters et al. Load of garbage but can be construed as a reasonable excuse but my Lord man, give that one up.
    Dunkley gambles in face of incredible odds? Surely you jest or are just trying to stir the shit. He may not be perfect but then again who am I to judge and that applies to you and others.
    I would rather see Dunkley, Smunkley and Funkley turn up at my door and present reasoning and current events than ” My names Fred and Um Gonna make it happen”. You can contact me at my email “Fred the Bread” or twitter me at “Don’t Rock the Thread, I got your Bread”
    “Brown is evil” ? I wonder why people say things like that. Poor upbrining and education. Ill informed. I really disagree with comments like that. I mean the Premier never said that he would deceive us nor lead us astray.
    I never said that the election/s are won on the door step, which go back to what I said prior.
    Tell you what. Since your not related to all Pitchers I suggest you go too Great Head in that tiny village of what used to be St. Davids. Invite ($5 admision) members of the PLP/UBP/BDA/Independents to air your views.
    Arrange it so that it’s your day off, the house is clean, dinner is in the oven simmering on low (figure) and that the neighbors will watch out just in case some foriegn matter enter your premises.
    Stand there over the ‘Great Hole’ with your ear plugs well set and listen too “Rondine al Nido”.
    As the wind and sea slap your face and you look outward towards the east from whence came our heritage and pride and the salt laps your tongue and smothers your garments that are well worn and repaired by the hands of your forebearers and present you may feel something.
    Will it be the force of the wind? Will it be the shifting seas? Will it be the seaweed that gathers 100 feet below yet washes back and forth looking for a home or a place of rest or just sediment that becomes all.
    Turn around. Look at the people that you wish to address. Look at the masses that gathered to hear your long awaited reply as to why, when, where.
    Luciano sang and many listen and I reflect. The words? Can’t understand one because I am not fluent with them, yet I get the message because it is universal in text.
    Be a leader and do what I said. You may find a few at first but once the song and feeling is accepted change will come.
    The voice whether understood is neither here nor there.
    It’s the ‘Harmony’ that occurs after the fact.
    A great day too all.
    Gotta run…………..Geary Pitcher horn dee lyne…..Vat? Vat?….”I make my own pots, I make my own boats, and I make my own decisions………………..
    El Rummo.

  19. You win Rummy. Whatever it is you’re talking about, you win.
    I’ve grown tired of trying to have a rational debate with your online persona. Clearly you have an inordinate amount of time to dedicate to such efforts but quite unfortunately I don’t.

  20. I thought my comments were quite rational.
    And the irony is Mr. Pitcher your last sentence always sums it up. No offence but re-read it.
    As for debate, I thought I wa doing pretty good for an ole fart. But…if you want to give up thats your choice.
    “Online persona”. Please Denis, it’s only me. I am whom I am. I am the same in person as I am online. Thats why half of Bermuda stab me in the back each day.
    I come to your door and ask for a minute but most shut it because I am outspoken.
    Face the wind, left your lungs inflate and then debate.

  21. Denis, if you missed it, the constitution will be posted in full once it’s been ratified on The Alliances website.
    You said yourself above that not everything can be made fully public. This would go for an organisations draft constitution. Why? Cause it’s a document that will control how the organisation will operate. Why would an organisation make this document public when it’s still being agreed upon. Why would people expose a draft document before it’s been polished, to people who haven’t signed up or agreed to the core values of the party? That doesn’t make sense. Do you demand that a book is released before the author has vetted or finished it? Of course not. It’s only availble to the publisher or publishing company. If you want it that bad, sign up, if not then I welcome you to view it on Saturday evening for all it’s merits or criticism.
    Check me out I’m the BDA’s defacto spokesperson……..Do I get a GP car now? (grin)

  22. Hey Sean,
    I actually don’t see what the problem is with having the draft constitution up for public viewing. You can benefit from public constructive criticism, as well as potentially attract new members.
    And before you accuse me of hypocrisy again (I answered that accusation in the Hype thread), I think the same should be the case for the UBP and PLP and was frustrated no end that they didn’t make public the proposed amendments the other month. Some of it was made public, but not all, which led to all manner of unfounded speculation. About the only things in my opinion that could be justified for keeping private is the platform while it is in development and ones elections strategy. The rest, no harm in making it public.
    Thank you however for the public announcement that the BDA Constitution will be made available on Saturday coming.

  23. Oh Sean..your being a smart ass now. Of course you get a “GP” car.
    Check out “Soares Motors”. Beats the price at “Please Leave Pocket” motors at the corner of Church and Parliament.
    Hell..they just got an SDO on Larry Dennises Hideaway.
    Actually, I was speaking to Mr. Morgan last week and he stated that Ewart had a point but lead poisen is on the rise………………
    Anyway, Sean your confusing me. “GP” cars…is that/are those the ones that ‘Got Platinum’…….

  24. Jonathan, how long does it take to get constructive critisism?
    You and Mr. Pitcher are grasping and as a good Marxist you do your job.
    Spin is a bitch. In two years I will be voting for the UAU. …..
    My MP from Southampton East/West/South/North says that may switch party and become a member of this new recently funded and somewhat paved future……..
    Good day too all

  25. Sean,
    “Do you demand that a book is released before the author has vetted or finished it? Of course not. It’s only availble to the publisher or publishing company.”
    I’m sorry to break it to you but in this day in age lots of books are composed openly on the web before being published. Many authors have taken to composing core sections of books on blogs and using the feedback to evolve their ideas. It is when it is all compiled into a concise and coherent form that it has value as a published book over a blog.
    Same deal with your constitution, but really it’s up to you how you move forwards with it.
    In the meantime I’d at least recommend updating all sources with the information you’ve published here. Push out on your website, blog, twitter, etc that you’ve put your constitution out to your membership and will be ratifying it based upon their feedback. It shouldn’t take criticism about a lack of info for this info to come out, you should be actively pushing updates. Hell, it may even encourage more people to sign up to view it.
    By the way, I didn’t mean any disrespect via the defacto comment. Instead in all honesty you’re about the most transparency BDA has at the moment. While it’s taken some prodding you’ve given out alot of useful info that otherwise wasn’t known publically. please keep it up and if you can, get more people to follow your lead.

  26. Denis,
    No offense taken at all.
    I did not realise books were released before being published, bad analogy I guess, however I still wouldn’t want to read an unfinished product.
    I believe that I’m the only one who’s promonent on the blogs in the group. As that’s the circle you typically travel in then it only appears that I’m the most transparent. What we’re also doing is having a lot of what we call fireside chats, whereas members invite their neighbors and some of us show up and we have an honest and open discussion. It’s actually a very nice way of reconnecting with people and listening to their concern.

  27. Sean,
    Premier Brown had a whole bunch of “Meet and greets” with “open and frank” discussions where people were invited out. Do you think his governance has been transparent?
    Fireside chats are really nice but they aren’t transparency.
    eg, here’s what the white house has written on it:
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/
    “Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing. Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.”
    That sounds a lot more like what I’ve been talking about and a lot less like fireside chats.
    Is it unreasonable to post information you have shared here such as that your draft constitution has been sent out to members and will be ratified following their feedback on your twitter and your website? Ie, in publicly accessible places that are easy to find?
    I can appreciate a reluctance of posting the actual draft if that’s your prerogative however I can’t comprehend how you can post information on the public forums and on this blog that you don’t bother to update the public on.
    It’s really up to you what you do and how your party runs things, I just think it’s a step in the right direction to put as much out there as you can. A 140 character twitter post is a pretty easy means to do it.

  28. Denis,
    I agree, and it’s something that the BDA is committed to. As we generate more policies, platforms and other data it will be released. I can’t say it’ll be released in it’s draft form for the public, however I do know that invitations will be made to the membership at large for various projects to get as many people as possible working together in the right fields. As far as public desiminations, this will be typically done through the website and media first, however I will work on getting it across to other public forums, (I.e. blogs) as well as quickly as possible (Read the same day) Point well taken and while we are arguably the most technology inclined party, we will (and are) working on ways to turn it up a few notches. I’ll speak with my committee (Community Outreach) as well as the PR committee on getting this done better, faster, etc.
    Regarding the white house quote, between the constitution and the various platforms I anticipate that it will satisfy yours and everyone elses needs for further transparency. All of us (Bermudians) recognise the need for much more transparency at EVERY level of Government, I know that the BDA is committed to working towards this means. My personal view point is that it’s ALL of our money, and I want to see how its being handled, from start to finish and every step in between. I doubt that I’m alone with this. Nothing should be kept secret save for national security sensitive issues or anything that falls into line with this. The public should know what the government is doing and how they are doing it at every step of the way.

  29. Sean,
    Good to hear that progress is made but I think you’re still missing part of the point.
    “I will work on getting it across to other public forums, (I.e. blogs) as well as quickly as possible”
    Rather than put a ton of work into pushing the message out there utilize the community to do it for you.
    Your website should be redesigned to put latest news prominently first, blog style, not in some sidebar with headings only. The reason being it gives people motive to keep visiting your site for updates. A fundamental rule in web design is limit the work people need to do to get the information they desire. Every single click or scroll movement a person would have to do is a deterant. Subsequently, embrace twitter and update there.
    The reason I make these two points is that if you make the information easily accessible individuals like myself, Jonathan and others throughout the community will pick up on it and will sometimes spread the message for you, making your job easier.

  30. In today’s paper, the leader Craig Cannonier implies that he is a supporter of independence. In fact his quote says the following
    “And on Independence, he said: “That’s been buried for a while. That’s a decision for the people of Bermuda. It’s my belief it can only be done through referendum.
    “Personally, someone said to me if it’s not broke don’t fix it, but I’m of the mind of progression like any other country who’s dependent, they believe in the future and progress, and that progress includes Independence. Many of the great minds of the world became independent to progress.
    “Natural progress for Bermuda would probably be to embody Independence. However, what’s the best thing for Bermuda is still to be determined.”
    Now I firmly recall Dr Brown saying that in his opinion it is a natural progression for every human thing to want to be independent. He has also said that the people will decide when. yet he has been constantly accused of wanting to force independence down the peoples’ throats. I wonder what all the new BDA supporters feel about Mr. Cannonier’s position on independence. Do they support it? And/or will they still support him as leader? And even further will the party support independence for Bermuda?

  31. @ Ken – Yeah, I was actually rather surprised by Mr. Cannonier’s pro-independence stance. I imagine it will cause some degree of consternation amongst some BDA’ers. I expect that people won’t take as big an issue with the Leader of a new and unproven amorphous Party as they would from Dr. Brown as Leader of the established PLP and Premier. I’m curious to see if there will be any reactions to this from BDA’ers though.

  32. @ J Starling,
    Yeah i do take into account that Mr Cannonier isnt in a position to really drive an independence agenda but he won in a landslide on the weekend, and I wonder if those that voted for him would have indeed voted for him knowing that he is pro-independence. And its fine if they would have or not becuase there are PLP voters and UBP voters that dont agree with all the stances by certain individuals. But my issue is how Dr Brown has been villified everytime he even mentions the word independence. And he really hasnt said anything different than what Mr. Cannonier said.

  33. Ken,
    I think a large part of the reason Dr. Brown is vilified over independence isn’t so much independence itself but instead his unwillingness to let the people decide.
    Dr. Browns position has waffled as to whether or not he actually supports deciding by way of referendum as well as whether it would be one separate from an election. Furthermore, rather than simply putting the issue to vote immediately and then let it rest for a while if the decision is against, he wants to keep playing it into the media and vowes to wait for the time most opportune according to him, not the people of Bermuda.
    This is interpreted by some as self-serving and by contrast we don’t know when BDA would support a referendum on independence or whether it would be immediate, at a set date following their election or if it would be at the Premier’s choosing.
    Each element adds a different aspect that will impact people’s reactions.

  34. Denis, I was going to write a lengthy response to the independence “apples and oranges” comparison, but you summed it up perfectly.
    Having said that, I cannot support a pro-independence party or candidate, ESPECIALLY if they aren’t going to explain why we should proceed that way for any other reason than the vague “natural progression” nonsense.
    Silly attempts at catchphrases like “Many of the great minds of the world became independent to progress” do not endear me. We’re not talking about individual minds, we’re talking about an entire country, most of the population of which, it would seem, are against independence.
    Any leader that stands up and says they’re FOR independence had better have some concrete reasons for it and not just nebulous “Wouldn’t it be nice”s.
    NO-one has EVER come forward with a SOLID pro for independence. I’ve never seen ONE thing that would make it worth it. Not ONE pro that outweighs the cons.
    Until they do, I can’t take any politician that says they’re pro-independence seriously.
    “Wull… um… because…” isn’t good enough.

  35. Denis,
    Perhaps, but we dont really know. I am inclined to believe there are many different factors that are involved in people villifying Dr Brown over independence, least of all Dr Brown, and least of all Independence. When Alex scott was Premier and he initiated the Independence Comission, he was villified as well. Only recently he has become everyone’s best friend because he speaks against the current Premier. So i say all that to say that there are various reasons that people react how they do, and sometimes it isnt restricted the issue at hand.
    But getting back to Mr cannonier and the BDA, I would bet my money that many BDA supporters are having second thoughts. I dont expect them to admit to this, but lets assume Myron Piper steps up and says that he isnt for independence. Would they then have wished they could switch their vote?
    In addition, while we are talking transparency, I honestly believe that Donte Hunt, Mark Pettingill and Shawn crockwell (and also wayne furbert and darius tucker) should resign their seats and have bye-elections. They all ran under the UBP banner, their campaigns were funded by the UBP and within 2 years of being elected they had all defected from the Party. To me it is unacceptable. I understand Constitutionally that regardless of what party you represent, the individual holds the seat, so nothing can be done in that regard, but why are they so reticent to resign? I think bye-elections should be held in each of those 5 constituencies to duly elect a representative.

  36. Ken,
    Alex Scott was vilified over independence largely due to his “they didn’t know what they were signing” remarks with regards to the Bermudians For Referendum petition which effectively insulted about half of the registered electorate. That and his subsequent refusal to put the issue to referendum as well as his incredibly biased forums and documents on independence.
    Alex Scott has regained some credibility because in the eyes of many by contrast he was nowhere near as bad a Premier as Dr. Brown. Subsequently he has continuined to stand up and push for Public Access To Information legislation even going so far as to stand outside party lines to push what he believes in.
    Back to BDA, I don’t disagree, this is a major and unnecessary PR blunder on the part of BDA in my opinion.
    I highly agree the current BDA MPs should resign their seats. It is the honorable thing to do. So too should the other two.
    As for the article headline, I side with the Royal Gazette on that one. Mr. Cannonier is announcing a party position on a highly controversial issue that is in strict contrast to what the PLP and UBP have been willing to commit to and thus holds more weight over his independence remarks.

  37. I was willing to allow the BDAP MPs time to organise their new Party and the like before resigning their seats. They’ve pretty much done that and should use the opportunity of by-elections to test their platforms (once they finalise them). So, I’ll give them at least one more month to get that all organised then they should step down and get a new mandate (and not necessarily the same candidates).
    Don’t get me started on the member from Constituency #6 though…

  38. Agreed on the by-election.
    Agree with UE here, instead of the all the bull shit about “great minds” and “progress”, I would have rather heard, “after much consideration and education of all the people, we would support the decision via referendum”.
    Please pass that along Sean.

  39. Denis,
    perhaps to the alex scott issue…
    regarding the sexual orientation legislation, didnt the Throne speech say the govt will amend the legislation? So IMO that would mean the govt was taking a stand.
    I agree – perhaps they were waiting to be organized so they could fight a bye-election ‘fair and square’. If so, they have formed and would have the party machinery behind them…
    it could be exciting…

  40. Ken,
    Hmm, not sure regarding whether it was announced during the throne speech, if so my argument holds less merit.
    Jonathan, I’d tend to agree that another month is reasonable considering they wanted to form their positions. Certainly would help their case of defining themselves as clearly not the UBP if they went head to head.

  41. Yes, the Throne Speech (2009) clearly stated that the HR Act would be amended to accommodate sexual orientation. The water was muddied a bit since with discussion about ‘getting the language right’ but the idea was there all the same.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *