Obviously the news that six UBP members (as well as several Branch people) have resigned from the UBP in preparation for the launch of a “new” party has been well discussed online and in RL. The six most visual are Donte Hunt, Sean Pitcher, Mark Pettingill, Wayne Scott, Michael Fahy and Shawn Crockwell – three sitting MPs, the party chairman, a Senator and… well, Wayne Scott, who ran in the last election. They held a press conference yesterday stating that they have chosen to shore up a new Party that will move away from the racial polarization that currently is awash in Bermuda politics.
This is certainly laudable and I do certainly applaud them for making that step. However, and this is a huge however, I am a bit leary of what appears (to me) a split of UBP based more of electability than actual policy reform. It is a bit insulting to the bermudian electorate. This is not to say that this is actually what is happening but as per Kim Swan’s comments in today’s RG , this appears to be what he is commenting that has happened. A UBP lite or UBP 2.0.
I am looking forward with great anticipation to see what their platform will entail. I’m hoping to see more than catch phrases and platitudes. As yet, and yes, these are still early days, that is all that has been released.
I wonder what other’s thoughts are on these six and what they are proposing?
BERMUDA JEWEL 
I think this can be an awesome development for Bermuda as a whole. The UBP is not performing the duties expected of an opposition and the PLP excludes anyone that does not (a) look like them or (b) bow down and toe the party line no matter what.
It will take some time before this new party will gain a significant number of votes from the Bermudian electorate, but it will happen if the UBP dies off and the PLP continue to alienate huge parts of the population.
I hope this new party will force the PLP old guard to change their divisive political tactics of race baiting and fearmonerging.
But at the moment it hasn’t as it appears that not much has changed on their part (re: PLP blog on what they dubbed “The Crockwell Party,” sounds kind of similar to “The Combined Opposition” or “Bermuda’s Fox News’ etc). Even before this new political entity has had time to form and even appoint a name to the Party the PLP have already began their baseless attacks and labelling these individuals under one generic stereotype.
Can’t teach an old dog new tricks as they say. But here is to hoping that this new initiative can force the current Government (which won’t lose power anytime soon) to change their divisive ways and begin to see Bermuda and treat ALL of its people as one.
As Nioe’s new site is named, here’s to Wishful Thinking.
By: JMad on September 15, 2009
at 1:56 pm
I don’t think any comment can be made on what the new party is going to be like until we have their platform, their constitution. It’s wrong to call the new party UBP 2.0 simply because they may stand for similar ideals (as in election time platform). They should be judged on their internal party mechanism and their racial makeup. That is what must be the deciding factor, they should not be labled simply because they are both fiscally conservative this or social equality that.
@JMad
Stealing my catchline already? Sheesh, people have no respect these days.
By: Nioe on September 15, 2009
at 11:13 pm
For the political observers who are prepared to critique these developments, there are a several strategic and tactical faux-pas that haven’t gone unnoticed:
1. The absence of a leader
2. As far as political births go, it lacked finesse, branding and substance
3. Just where were the “supporters?”
4. Top down vs bottom up approach
5. No name
6. No real substance – apart from a few politically motivated comments
7. No “ stickiness “ factor (this analogy is drawn from the marketing book on the subject of why some products succeed and others fail)
8. Political handlers and media professionals (if any are associated with the new party) must have cringed at the six grim faces portrayed in today’s RG.
This had all the hall-marks of a rapidly pasted together “launch” which lacked a cohesive plan. And yet, they’ve been “planning” this for 18 months? Yes, all are relative political neophytes who didn’t draw on (or disregarded) professional handlers or advice on how to launch something as significant as a political party. Not the best or the most reassuring way to foist themselves on the Bermuda electorate – and it hasn’t done much to inspire others that they are fit to govern either. Other commentators are absolutely correct; further judgment needs to be reserved, and will be, until the details of a platform, vision and mission are known. But, so far, a very poor launch.
By: The Who? on September 16, 2009
at 1:36 am
@ Who?
Hey atleast they have done something. its a start. A famous Chinese saying goes:
The journy of a thousand steps begins with the first step.
CDF
By: Ex-Progessive Mind on September 16, 2009
at 12:10 pm
As Who suggests, this does appear on the surface to be a planned move, but a not well planned one. The resignations themselves are ok, but the press conference where they discuss forming a new party, just didn’t seem organised.
And like JMad says, they’ve gotten themselves named by others before naming themselves. For better or worse, they’re now the Crockwell Party.
By: Tryangle on September 16, 2009
at 1:00 pm
Better Crockwell than “CrockPOT”…….Bawahahaaaaaaaaaa
If you only knew what was in that “pot”………….
By: Rummy on September 16, 2009
at 3:02 pm
@The Who?
all are relative political neophytes who didn’t draw on (or disregarded) professional handlers or advice … Not the best or the most reassuring way to foist themselves on the Bermuda electorate
Well, this is small Bermuda, where our Premiers used to have enough humility and sense of their true scale to ride to work on a Mobylette….
I kind of found the non-polished-to-a-glittering-professional-political-sheen aspect kind of charming, myself.
it hasn’t done much to inspire others that they are fit to govern
Well, that’s a good point. Let’s see what happens down the road, though.
I think I’m still a bit dubious that the ‘NewBP’ branding by the PLP (who are masters at negative brading of their opponents, although nothing else they do seems to reach that level of skill) won’t be something these guys won’t be able to overcome. (Although the fact that the UBP is continuing on is I think good, it makes that particular case a tiny bit harder to make.)
Some have speculated that until there is no opposition at all, the PLP won’t fracture – and that’s what it may take to break the grip of the PLP’s race-based politics.
By: Noel on September 16, 2009
at 5:27 pm
the only way they will get grass roots support of the majority of this nation who are officially poor….IE make less that 70k per yr
if with an adjenda that will break the cycles of economic unequality in BDA.
lets see if they have vision.
By: black press on September 16, 2009
at 7:44 pm
This needs to be investigated banks account numbers of all six must be produced for Brown deposits.
By: red party on September 19, 2009
at 5:54 pm
One whole week and no isssue on the table like $5000 for pregnant teenagers. Share the wealth.
By: red party on September 19, 2009
at 6:25 pm
Now that I think about it, I’m not sure these guys are doing any good. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I’m leaning towards my statement above:
“until there is no opposition at all, the PLP won’t fracture – and that’s what it may take to break the grip of the PLP”
So I’m currently thinking that all the opposition should just fold up, as parties. Sure, go ahead and sit as independent individuals, if they want, but no party. No new parties at all.
That will present a mild constitutional crisis, as the mechanisms of state assume that there is an opposition party, but that’s exactly the point.
If the PLP wants to have any opposition party, as opposed to a one-party state, it will have to break up, and provide one itself.
By: Noel on September 19, 2009
at 6:31 pm
Yo!!! Red, what about the $50,000 from the parents of the “teenager” ?.
Hell, next you’ll want free weed…………….
If you don’t get that you’ll nawa will…….
By: Rummy on September 20, 2009
at 7:30 pm
Free six pack of elephants for the homeless at City hall.
By: red party on September 20, 2009
at 8:54 pm
ok now you’re just taking the piss.
But yeah, the NewBP needs to get going with their action plan now that they’ve unmasked themselves.
By: Tryangle on September 20, 2009
at 11:00 pm
Definitely interesting times, but you can’t judge them yet when as a “new party” they haven’t actually done anything. The first important step has been made, now can they deliver.
What will be truly interesting is who they manage to attract from the PLP, all elephants aside.
By: Still has faith on September 21, 2009
at 6:18 pm
Where do the homeless vote? Dale butler wrote a book about homelessness but failed to give any solutions. A man deserves food clothing and shelter free of charge but when it rains Nellie wharf boys are locked outside of parks, city hall and everywhere else and tents are stolen by downpressors red party demands year round camping season. but these corrupt politicans want people to their high rents. of course most on this site hate the poor but we will rise up no matter the hate from the middle class and elite. National socialumus!
By: red party on September 22, 2009
at 10:07 pm
@red party
A man deserves food clothing and shelter free of charge
Ah, no – not from the state. That just gives some people an incentive to kick back, and let others support them. If it were easy to filter out genuine hardship cases, yes, but it’s hard to do that in a way that passes strict objective muster (as in, written into law).
Private charities may decide to do that, and if so, fine – it’s their money, they can do what they want with it. They can also exercise fine-grained control, and toss out the merely lazy, and only help those who are genuinely unfortunate, etc.
By: Noel on September 22, 2009
at 11:01 pm
Pretty much what Noel said. Every person should have the opportunity to get food and shelter, no doubt, but they have to be willing to contribute.
Are they on hard times and resorting to drinking, for example? Then offer them a chance to get their lives back on track through certain rehab programmes which include job placements. It’s up to the individual, though, to make the choice of becoming productive.
Government should be helping out wherever possible – the Salvation Army shelter comes to mind but not supporting deadbeats.
Perhaps the parks *should* be open throughout the night, but they’d then need to be monitored for security reasons – and since CoH can’t even put proper security in their car parks during broad daylight, having security at nightime seems like a total non-starter.
By: Tryangle on September 23, 2009
at 12:34 pm
I personally feel that shelter, healthcare and education should be included as a human right myself. Naturally, one must contribute; don’t work, don’t eat (within reason), but at the same time I don’t think it would be ethical to withold these rights. Only the quality should be affected.
By: J Starling on September 25, 2009
at 11:54 pm
Not sure how you can feel that shelter, healthcare, and educations should be human rights.
I believe in the right to life and the right to freedom. Making shelter or healthcare a right would go against life and liberty. I feel you are in fact saying is that if I was a doctor I would have no choice (no freedom) but to give my services to any who asked for it? I would work and use my limited time on this earth (my life) not for my self but for others, when you tax me and use that money to provide shelter and education you take some of my life away from me. No Jonny thats evil and a source of many of the problems we have in Bermuda today
By: J Galt on September 27, 2009
at 2:03 am
The right to shelter, clothing and are inalienable human rights which every human being should be granted with the opprtunity to procure for themselves and their families.
I don’t believe that citizens, of any country, should automatically assume that the Government should be responsible for providing these necessities. The Government should provide the ‘opportunity’ for its citizens to be able to achieve these life necessities.
These opportunities can come in the form of Governments creating an economic/social system which in and of itself is transparent and fair to all participants. There should exist no hindrances, due to individual beliefs or affiliations (i.e. race, polticial affiliation et al), for a person due to differing characteristics and/or opinions. Therefore no legislation should expressly benefit one group while simultaneously putting an unfair advantage of another group within that society.
Government should ensure that this fair and equitable market place is achieved through legislation and a fair economic infrastructure on which the country will operate.
This opportunity is also created by Government through the creation and maintainence of an effective publc education system. Now more than ever academic, professional qualifications and things such as basic arithmetic and english will just about determine your place in the workplace and thus economic heirarchy. A poor education system thus inhibits the creation and maintenance of an equal, fair and transparent marketplace.
Where Government has failed in any of its basic duties to provide for such an environment then can one expect a helping hand or assitance from the powers that be. Other than circumstances such as these I believe that individual(s) which are severely disadvantaged (i.e. terminally ill, mentally ill etc) should be afforded greater assistance from the Government powers.
I don’t believe in big Government infringing and interfering in the everday lives of the people or the economy of the society for which they have been elected to serve.
I believe that if provided an opportunity to provide for themselves then it is up to the person to ensure that they do just that. If everything is expected to be provided by Government then you will have a class of people who do not feel the importance of working and will thus become burdensome on the hard working population who is working to create their own destinies and fortunes.
By: JMad on September 28, 2009
at 7:16 pm
With the economic gap income and welfare state programs need to be implimented to reduce robberies and crime.
Of course income will cost too much money to collect the taxes this money saved can be used to build a welfare state to centralize the poor and control crime a lot better.
Anyone who works more than 40 hours to maintain is struggling and needs help from government.
Nobody has to work in prison and it costs hard working people $7000 a month to maintain a prison.
By: red party on September 28, 2009
at 10:05 pm
What’s weird is that we have a few Bermudians who are having kids, getting Government checks to pay for daycare and spending the day at home snoozing instead of working or at least registering for some taxpayer-paid-for Bermuda College courses.
It’s not as stark as what goes on in England sometimes but still.
By: Tryangle on September 29, 2009
at 2:51 pm
the government should be doing more to economically help the ppl makin under the poverty line.
This is modern day slavery in bermuda
By: black press on October 2, 2009
at 8:41 pm
In Saudi Arabia the government gives newlyweds $100000 to be fruitful and multiply. With a zero birth rate evry bermudian parents should be congradulated for bringing the next generation forward with a least $5000 worth of baby formula raising children is the number one occuption in a nation. Children are the judge of productivity and quality of life.
By: Red party on October 3, 2009
at 6:34 pm
@black press
This is modern day slavery
Don’t be ridiculous. It’s offensive to try and create an equivalence between being poor (unpleasant as that admittedly is), and the horrors endured by those who had to suffer the Middle Passage and its terrible aftermath.
By: Noel on October 3, 2009
at 8:53 pm
I would say that the analogy could be applied if one is referring to ‘wage slavery’ and capitalism as the road to slavery, along the same lines as von Hayek’s description of totalitarianism (in this case Stalinism) as the road to serfdom.
By: J Starling on October 3, 2009
at 9:33 pm
I disagree with redparty on giving $5000 worth of baby formula to people. Adults still need to be responsible for bringing and raising children in this place. Now if they show academic achievement (or technical, as seen fit) then Govt can reward the kids and parents with scholarships for higher education, etc.
Besides, with all this baby mommma baby daddy drama going on who’s going to allocate to who anyway?
By: Tryangle on October 5, 2009
at 3:13 pm
nole ..only rich snobs cant identify with the struggles of the working class
By: black press on October 9, 2009
at 1:17 am
give it up black press ,there is no way liberal nazis can identify with the poor underclass, which is now the majority of the working class
Ewart is too busy posing and hob knobing with movie stars , the whole plp elite are a disgrace to Dr Gordon & Freddie Wade
By: perry on October 18, 2009
at 7:55 pm