PATI Feedback

I just wanted to remind and encourage readers to send their feedback on the proposed PATI legislation. As I understand it the deadline for submitting such feedback is November 30th, so about a week and a half from now. The submission can be by email, with the relevant address being pati/gov.bm (replace the ‘/’ with ‘@’), or by post:

The Cabinet Secretary
Ref – PATI
The Cabinet Office,
105 Front Street,
Hamilton, HM 12

As I understand it they would prefer that you cite the particular sections that you are referring to as needing change, although I am sure if you simply write giving your general views, these will also be welcomed. Referring to the particular sections would however give your feedback greater weight.

I am not a big fan of writing template letters which produce several identical copies. In my experience these letters are largely dismissed en masse, almost as spam. It is my experience though that the greater the number of submissions, especially if they all focus on the same issues, will truly have an impact on policy design, and so I would strongly encourage individuals to send their feedback in, even if it is just a short email stating that you strongly support PATI being retroactive (for example).

When the PATI legislation came out I wrote a series of posts on it, including the sections that I was referring to as needing rewritten. If readers want they can read over them and get the various sections or ideas from my own writing, although I caution that individuals should also apply their own thinking and not simply cut and paste, as I am not infallible (lol!). I will be condensing all of my thoughts on PATI into a single document and sending out as feedback before the 30th, and I will also post this document here. If readers like, they are welcome to also post their feedback thoughts here too, partly for posterity and partly for impact. It’s up to the individual.

For those interested in going over my past posts on the legislation, they can click on the links below:

PATI-cake, PATI-cake… Kerpow!
Looking Over The Draft PATI Legislation
Review Of The PATI Companion Document
More On PATI – The 30 Year Rule
PATI & Retrospectivity

Thoughts On The Throne Speech

I don’t have much to say about the Opposition replies to the 2009 Throne Speech. However, I have written a post over on JEWEL concerning my own thoughts on the Speech. In general I found the speech okay, although I think it limits itself too much on some issues, and I’ve expanded on them in my post.

Amending The Human Rights Act – I

There has been an interesting discussion on the thread ‘Lets Talk Bermuda‘ focusing on the 2009 Throne Speech’s call for amending the Human Rights Act (HRAct). I had been leaving that thread to develop by itself as I didn’t want to break the dynamics there, however I think it would make sense to start a new thread devoted to the topic alone.

The main issue with the proposed amending of the HRAct is the focus on including sexual orientation in the Act. In a highly religious and generally homophobic community, this was always bound to cause controversy. There are a number of arguments that seem to be continuously raised in objection to such an amendment and I hope to clarify these and give my own thoughts on them.

I should say at the moment that this blog has been, and continues to be, solidly behind amendin the HRAct to include sexual orientation, yet I welcome hearing more voices on this issue. It is true that the online community tends to be dominated by a handful of voices, and these voices tend to be generally supportive of amending the HRAct to include sexual orientation. It is also true that these voices are perhaps not representative of the community as a whole, and it is important to encourage alternate voices on this issue, if only for mutual understanding of the problem. I hope that new voices will be heard both for an against the amendment, although I stress that our democracy must not solely be the rule of numerical superiority, as this leads to mob democracy and the rule of prejudice. Democracy must be tempered with empathy for others, with justice and ethics (as opposed to morality and prejudice).

I had originally written a rather long post, dealing with the various questions that are put up around this issue. After looking at its length however, I’ve decided to to break it up and post individual bits over the week. Questions that I will be looking at are:

The question of choice or biological determinism and ’special rights’

There is no evidence for discrimination – a catch-22

I don’t want to rent to gays

Sexual orientation is already covered by the HRAct…

The HRAct specifically states what is covered by the HRAct in Section 2 (Interpretation), subsection (2)(a), which states in full:

(2) For the purposes of this Act a person shall be deemed to discriminate against another person—

(a) if he treats him less favourably than he treats or would treat other persons generally or refuses or deliberately omits to enter into any contract or arrangement with him on the like terms and the like circumstances as in the case of other persons generally or deliberately treats him differently to other persons because —

(i) of his race, place of origin, colour, or ethnic or national origins;
(ii) of his sex;
(iii) of his marital status;
(iiiA) of his disability;
(iv) he was not born in lawful wedlock;
(v) she has or is likely to have a child whether born in lawful wedlock or not;
(vi) of his religion or beliefs or political opinions; or
(vii) of his criminal record, except where there are valid reasons relevant to the nature of the particular offence for which he is convicted that would justify the difference in treatment.

Of these, only the categories of (ii) – Sex, and (iiia) – disability, could concievably cover that of sexual orientation. However, ’sex’ in this list refers solely to the biological characteristics of male or female, and ‘disability’ is specifically defined as:

“…a person who has any degree of physical disability, infirmity, malformation, or disfigurement that is caused by bodily injury, birth defect or illness, including diabetes, epilepsy, acquired immune deficiency syndrome, human immunodeficiency virus, paralysis, amputation, lack of physical coordination, blindness or visual impediment, deafness or hearing impediment, muteness or speech impediment, or physical reliance on a guide dog, wheelchair or other remedial appliance or device.”

*I just want to stress that I think it would be highly insulting to consider sexual orientation under disability.*

It seems clear then that ’sexual orientation’ is not covered under the existing HRActs categories.

Bermuda Green Party Still Going – And With More Policy Than The BDA…

Some time back I reported here about the Bermuda Green Party, which launched a Facebook site back in June 2009 and a more recent blog in September. They hadn’t had much activity pretty much ever since I made that announcement, and with the launch of Bermuda’s Democratic Alliance last week I was worried they had ceased altogether. So it came as a great relief to me that they have been active in the last few days, posting a series of new topics on their blog concerning reducing imports, water conservation and sustainable housing.

Despite the novelty of the BDA’s use of Facebook as a method for developing policy and interaction, in truth it was the Bermuda Green Party that has pioneered this technique in the Bermudian context. And despite the BDA benefiting from some 18 months of gestation (if you include as I do the reform movement within the UBP that later became the BDA), and the fact that the BDA has many members who have been active in UBP politics for years, it is the Bermuda Green Party that has a more substantial policy than the BDA.

The Bermuda Green Party does not have any identifiable names behind it; it’s main agent is anonymous and it has no MPs. It is even questionable whether it intends to be a political party in anything more than name. In these departments the BDA far outshines the Bermuda Green Party at the moment. The BDA also has access to members experienced in politics, both in organising (having several defecting UBP Party Chairmen and Branch Officers involved) and parliamentary procedure, not to mention a surge of support (based on their facebook site), no doubt helped by the media coverage they have received to date. This gives the BDA a huge advantage over the Bermuda Green Party to date.

Where the Bermuda Green Party has an advantage over the BDA is in the realm of policy and ideology, as well as international recognition, with prominent Green Party movements in Germany, France, the UK, Canada and the USA. The policies discussed on the Bermuda Green Party’s facebook site and blog are, by far, more substantial than the flowery rhetoric which is all the BDA has to date. The Bermuda Green Party can easily tap into the experiences (and assistance) of its international sister parties, as well as the well-developed Bermudian environmentalist movement here. If it is able to do so then the Bermuda Green Party could easily transform itself into a formal and well organised political party in time for the next election (well barring any snap elections that is).

In truth the BDA has described itself as a centrist political party, and based on that it can conceivably draw on the experiences and assistance of the Liberal International. In such a way the BDA has a readily recognisable political ideology and platform from which it could draw upon. The difficulty is that both the PLP and UBP have been focused on a politics of the centre since at least 1998, and it will be difficult for the BDA to differentiate itself from their respective positions.

The main challenges for the Bermuda Green Party are those of organisation and race. It must transform itself into an actually organised political party, able to contest elections and push its policies effectively. Beyond that, and as much as one wishes it weren’t so, Bermuda’s politics are still greatly influenced by race. And Bermuda’s environmentalist movement are, rightly or wrongly, perceived as being largely White. The BDA has the potential to alter these political racial dynamics sufficiently to reduce this challenge for the Bermuda Green Party. One further challenge for the Bermuda Green Party is that with the emergence of the BDA there is the risk that they will run out of momentum, with any potential interest being captured by the BDA at the moment. They also risk seeing their policies co-opted by the BDA in the mean time, which from a green point of view is not necessarily bad/

Minister Without Portfolio, Mr. DeSilva

The RG is reporting that Mr. DeSilva has been appointed to Cabinet as a Minister Without Portfolio today. Mr. DeSilva’s elevation will no doubt be highly controversial within the Party, especially within the backbenchers of the parliamentary caucus, even if the Party as a whole puts forward a united front of self-congratulation.

I want to make it clear that I have nothing against Mr. DeSilva. I have always found him to be extremely nice whenever I have met him, and I think he has a great sense of humour too for what its worth. However he has also been a bit of a controversial political figure, implicated in several accusations of corruption, and there are some who have regarded him as nothing more than an opportunist within the Party and a lackey of Dr. Brown. His elevation will reinforce those views in many, both inside and outside of the Party.

I have always regarded the position of a Minister Without Portfolio to be little more than a form of political patronage and a tactic to boost ones support within Cabinet – they come usually as rewards for loyalty, and to increase loyal support within Cabinet. A Minister Without Portfolio is an MP who is allowed to sit and vote within Cabinet and who receives (as I understand it) the wages of a part-time Minister ($100k) in addition to the basic MPs salary of about $60k, although the Minister has no responsibilities whatsoever. Usually they serve as Junior Ministers, but to be frank a Junior Minister does as much or as little as they please.

In a period where Bermuda is facing a decidedly negative economic climate, with many workers worried about their job security and pension funds, and after the Government has pledged to cut spending which, among other things like canceling the St. Georges ferry, has led to increased tension amongst government workers, this appointment will be looked at badly. There will be many who will argue that there is one rule for the average worker and another for the ‘big men’, and this may even contribute to the threat of industrial action in the near future.

Had Mr. DeSilva been appointed a Ministry, such as the Ministry of Transport or even the Ministry of Sport (currently joined with Environment) then any criticism would have been reduced. Handing over the Ministry of Transport could have actually benefited Dr. Brown (who currently holds that portfolio), allowing him to focus more on Tourism and the various projects he has committed himself to in his final year as Premier (by his own words). That he has instead handed Mr. DeSilva a non-Ministry Ministerial position will lead most to view the appointment as blatant patronage, both as a reward for Mr. DeSilva’s loyalty and to bolster Dr. Brown’s support within Cabinet. That Dr. Brown has vowed to pursue a pro-gambling agenda before he steps down in October 2010, an agenda for which he has faced opposition within Cabinet and the backbench, will not escape the attention of many.

Dr. Brown may find that his decision to elevate Mr. DeSilva to Cabinet, without a Ministry, may prove to have some unfortunate repercussions for his plans, and he will have to work hard to dismiss criticisms of patronage and poli-tricks.

Online Responses To The Democratic Alliance

With the launch of Bermuda’s Democratic Alliance on Thursday the online community has understandably been in a bit of a flurry of discussion about them. This has ranged from sheer expressions of enthusiasm on the Democratic Alliance’s facebook site, to more critical reactions elsewhere.

The popular forum BIAW has had a long discussion concerning both the Democratic Alliance itself and it’s choice of name, or, rather the acronym it prefers ‘BDA’ which some see as witty but potentially divisive in as much as it co-opts the shorthand for Bermuda. Most of the discussion on BIAW has focused on the apparent lack of substance provided by the Democratic Alliance, as well as an ongoing conversation between posters there and the DA’s de facto online representative ‘Full Fullish’ who has also posted here.

On Facebook the DA has left both the PLP and the UBP in the proverbial dust, both in terms of ‘fans’ and in the novel use of the sites features for incorporating public input. The PLP mostly pioneered the use of Facebook for Bermudian politics, setting up both an official site and supporting ones. The PLP’s former youth wing Progressive Minds also experimented with having online forums there to increase interaction between youth and Cabinet Ministers. Despite these early attempts, the official site is mostly inactive, not being used for announcements or interaction. The UBP’s Facebook site is even more restricted, being nothing more than an information page. The DA now has almost twice the amount of ‘fans’ than the PLP and close to three times the number of UBP fans. This in itself does not mean that all these fans are supporters of the DA, however I think it is fair to say the majority are. The DA has also begun exploiting the interactive features available on Facebook which is woefuly underutilised by the PLP and UBP. At the moment the success of the DA on Facebook seems indicative of their support amongst a substantial number of youth, especially the middle classes. Whether the DA is able to capitalise on this momentum or if this will contribute to an early flame out (enthusiasm with no direction) is to early to tell at the moment.

21square has two posts on the DA, the first one being critical of the Alliance’s choice in name, based on the argument that the acronym ‘BDA’ and its meaning were first developed through that blogs Bermuda wiki project. The second post, to date, questions the logic behind the launch date.

The newly resurgent Bda Longtail criticises the DA for the disorganisation that it is conveying, namely in its failure to get its frequently referred to former PLP members to show up for public unveiling. Bda Longtail cautions that if the DA isn’t careful it will rapidly be seen as little more than another UBP.

Beachlime doesn’t comment on the DA directly, however he vents his frustration (which I passionately share) with the overkill use of Obamist phrases. Obama this. Change we can believe in. Yes we can. Stuff like that. When they were put into public discourse they were fresh, if meaningless, rhetorical devices. Now they are just nausea inducing in their insipid lack of originality.

Triangle Tips criticises the vague political name that the DA has chosen, questioning what exactly is it an alliance of? He also criticises the apparent vacuousness of the DA’s platform (or lack thereof). The basic verdict put forward there is that if the DA wants to be taken seriously it needs to demonstrate how exactly it is different from both the PLP and the UBP, otherwise it will look like a bunch of disgruntled UBPers in new clothing.

Bermuda Fables provides what I see as the most detailed critique of the DA online to date. In general the DA is criticised for being overly reliant on flowery rhetoric rather than actually marking out what exactly they stand for. They are also criticised for failing to unveil their now almost mythical former PLP members that they keep nattering on about.

Much of the criticism online though has been more of disappointment or exasperation combined with a plea that the DA gets its act together and move beyond vapid rhetoric and clarify both what stands for and what it plans to do. Should the DA fail to articulate its own vision then alot of the initial enthusiasm that it has been able to generate risks evaporating as the chorus of it being little more than disgruntled UBPers in new clothes reaches a crescendo. Personally I believe that the DA is articulating (poorly) a liberal ideological position, and that it will begin fleshing this out in the coming days. At the moment I get the impression that they are just trying to appeal to people superficially in order to prepare them for liberalism. The only problem with this is that the political centre is solidly occupied by the PLP and UBP at the moment, and if they are not careful they will come across as little more than a hodge-podge of PLP-UBP policies rather than having an identity of their own beyond that of a fence sitter. Their exodus from the UBP does however present the potential that the bulk of the UBPs liberal wing has solidified behind them, leaving the UBP rump made up of the conservative wing, which could allow the DA to occupy the centre and push the UBP to the right. The other big challenge for the DA is articulating their position on the race question; so far they have come across with a mix of vapidity and UBPist approaches on this point.

Let’s Talk Bermuda – With Dr. Brown

I understand that Dr. Brown will be appearing on Gary Moreno’s live call-in show tonight at 8pm. This show is also mostly streamed online, so Bermudians around the world should be able to follow the discussion and even contribute by posting questions to be asked on the website.

As I understand it there is no set agenda for the talk, although it is likely that the recently released Black male study, the Throne Speech and gambling will be key talking points. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Democratic Alliance is also a feature of discussion, although all of this depends on interaction with callers and posters.

I personally don’t know if I’ll be able to participate from Scotland due to the time difference, but I will certainly review the show the next day.

Problems For Socialism In Bermuda

With the formal launch of the Bermudian ‘Democratic Alliance’ there is now a potential for a return to ideological politics as opposed to the poli-trix that has dominated our island since 1998. This is because so far our politics has been dominated by that bland form of ideology that is known as the political centre. In truth, there have been some differences between the UBP and the PLP, as I have discussed in other posts. But beyond the question and understanding of race, as well as their respective composition and support bases, there has been woefully little difference between the two parties on substantial issues of ideology and policy.

At most the argument has been of ‘we would do this more’ or, ‘we would do this less’, mixed in with the occasional kindergarten exchanges that defines our parliamentary debates more than anything else. The UBP, nominally a conservative, right-wing party, and the PLP, nominally a social democratic/labour party, have been in recent years about as indistinguishable as Tweedledum and Tweedledee. With the arrival of Tweedleda on the stage, the hypnotic (if not idiotic) dance between Tweedledum and Tweedledee is presented with a challenge that can be answered in three potential ways:

a) Tweedledum & Tweedledee will together push Tweedleda off the stage and quickly return to their status quo;

b) Tweedledum, the UBP, is faced with the greatest initial challenge from Tweedleda, and may simply retire from the dance, leaving us with the same dance, only this time between Tweedledee and Tweedleda;

c) Tweedleda will force a fundamental change to the dance, pushing Tweedledum and Tweedledee away from the centre, Tweedledum to the right and Tweedledee to the left, with Tweedleda occupying the centre.

Only option (c) leads to substantial change for our politics; options (a) and (b) maintain the status quo, even if (b) gives the superficial impression of change. It is for option (c) that I personally would like to see realised, as this option provides the best potential for our collective national development. Of course there is the option that our politics may become more complex should further new parties solidify, such as a Green Party, the embryonic stages of which have been noted already. At the moment however I feel that many potential new parties, such as the Green Party, will pause and reflect on the Democratic Alliances arrival, which, no doubt, will try to co-opt such groups. As such I cannot see the political equation becoming more complex in the immediate period.

It is also hard to tell if (c) would lead to a substantial push to the left or right from the UBP and PLP; the equilibrium could simply result in a centre-left, centre, centre-right combination, although it would be hard to see how the centre will maintain itself over the long-term in such an arrangement.

Regardless of which option ends up being the eventual outcome of Tweedleda’s appearance, the very challenge itself presents an opportunity for at least a brief push towards ideological discussion and consciousness raising. To this end the Bermudian left (yes, there is actually one) should seek to exploit this development, and I hope to explore the problems for socialism in Bermuda that this moment allows. To do so it is necessary to outline what exactly are the problems for socialism in Bermuda? As I see it the following questions must be posed and answered:

What is the state of the Bermudian left? Where is the left? Is there a Bermudian left? Why is the left in the situation that it is?

The question of identity – or the problem of bad examples? The stigma of Stalinism and dogmatism in general.

Reform or revolution? The nature of the revolutionary organisation and the relationship with the ‘traditional left’ of organised labour and the PLP. Armed uprisings, parliamentary elections and political consciousness. Strategy and tactics.

Socialism in one country – to Cuba or not to Cuba? The day after and what comes next.

Socialisms? The problem of groupuscules – the People’s Front of Judea or the Judean People’s Front?

Key questions for the left – racism, sexism, ecology and power.

Over the next few days, when I am able, I will try to answer these problems as best I can. I would welcome suggestions from readers about what other questions they think need answered, and I will either incorporate them into the above problems, or dedicate posts to them alone.

Welcome Back Bermuda Longtail Blog!

I just wanted to welcome back the blog ‘Bermuda Longtail‘ which started last year and then kind of went dormant for a while. Alot of blogs have been shaking off their dormancy of late, and while there are many possible reasons for this, I welcome the greater number of Bermudian voices online. I reckon that the various political events of this year, and the formation of the DA is contributing to a resurgence of online commentary, and that is certainly something to be encouraged.

Swan Still Sailing On

Well, I guess I should offer my congratulations to Mr. Kim Swan who seems to have successfully been re-elected as leader of the UBP. I had predicted that Mr. Richards would emerge the leader, based on what I saw as the various albatrosses around Mr. Swan’s neck (reform inaction, NewBP schism, lack of strong leadership actions, failed motion of no confidence).

It will be curious to see how the UBP develops from this point on, especially with the rise of the DA. It may be possible that the UBP finally begins the transition to a conservative political party that truly reflects Bermuda’s racial demography, as many of the UBP’s long-suffering White members jump ship over to the DA, invigorated by the novelty of the development. Alternatively the DA will succeed in eclipsing the UBP over time; however this just simply leads to a political shell game, where the DA becomes the UBP in everything except name.

Personally, I’m hoping that the DA’s actions lead to a more ideological politics, with three political parties representing the ideological positions of social democracy, liberalism and conservatism, with each party having a racial composition more representative of our populations. Hopefully this will help further our political maturity by going some way to de-racialising our political system, and allow politics to become more about ideology.