Referendum Spin

Bermudians are not the only people arguing about the need for a referendum at the moment.

In the UK a debate is currently raging over whether the British government should call a referendum on a new EU constitution, due to be agreed by mid-June. Under fierce pressure for one from the opposition Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, there are signs that the Labour government may be buckling. The Opposition is demanding that the government stop spinning the issue and clarify its position.

The pros and cons of this particular debate are less important than the British government's stated position on when a referendum would be appropriate: if there were fundamental changes to the UK's relationship with the EU.

Substitute 'Bermuda' for 'the UK' and 'UK' for 'EU' and I'd say that sums up the position Alex Scott should be adopting too.

Comments

[John on 16.04.04 at 18:27]

This referendum debacle seems such an obvious "no brainer" that I really struggle to see why any rational person of any political stripe would not support it as the only democratic method for a civilised society to decide major (and I mean MAJOR), irreversible decisions. How you hold a general election over one issue?
Can someone explain what possible logic there would be to decide such a nation-changing decision at an election?

[Ross Eldridge on 16.04.04 at 21:33]

Just a thought, guys ...

What if a referendum is held and voter apathy or boycott (think of John Swan's referendum on Independence which might well have been a good-sized "Yea" if the PLP had not called on its supporters to NOT vote either way) has a less than decent number of citizens voting, shall we say, in favour of Independence. Say 75% of the electorate got out and voted in a referendum and of those voting, 52% voted in favour of Independence ... which would be, I think, and an accounting type might correct me if need be, about 39% of the citizenry voting "Yea". Would that be acceptable to those folks in Bermuda and the UK looking forward to the day when the Union Jack comes down in Bermuda?

Perhaps the mathematicians might do the sums here, but how about a simple rule, the votes cast either "Yea" or "Nay" must have a numerical count that is over 50% of the total number of adult citizens for that vote to count and result in an action taking or not taking the last step ... Independence.

Now, I've been out of accounting for many years, and it is over thirty years since I took my GCE in "statistics". I deal with words and pictures now.

Picture this: "Will all the Bermudians in favour of Independence please step to the right. Those opposed to the left. When you've all moved, which way does the Island tilt? (No people in the middle, please, especially not the long-term residents without status ... You folks go for a swim offshore while we Bermudians have our 'Spashull Day')."

Could the answer be a Poll, rather than a Referendum? Door to door, no middle ground.

RE

[BDA JOE on 16.04.04 at 22:14]

Here's another thought. Voting in a referendum regarding independence should be manditory. That's right, you have to vote by law, turn out has to be 100% or the result is null and void.

The prevailing ignorance in Bermuda these days of anything political cannot allow us to make perhaps the worst blunder in our history.

[Ross Eldridge on 17.04.04 at 13:46]

Hello Joe:

That's kind of what I meant in my remarks. I'd recommend a door to door approach, or something to ensure that nearly 100% of the citizenry made a choice. I believe Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to take part in politics, and I'm not sure that people with severe psychiatric disorders would be better for the experience of "voting". How about prisoners? I'm afraid the "long term residents" taking part does not seem reasonable to me, or spouses of Bermudians who have been so espoused for less than, say, ten years. I have no doubt that many people will bitch and moan about whatever choice is made. Good grief: I recall people complaining when the property qualification was dropped and when the "plus vote" was terminated. This suggestion of mine has every person marking a ballot, supervised and assisted by highly reputable persons, in secret. Any election is an invitation for cheating. Might outside "officials" be invited to keep an eye on it? We need to figure out how it could be done, or we'll end up with someone thinking it doesn't need to be done.

RE

[BDA JOE on 17.04.04 at 15:58]

I think what has to be realized is that the decision of whether or not to go independent has to be treated as more important than an election, this is above politics. In ensuring that it seems logical that such a move would not be decided by an election, doesn't it?

As for who can and cannot be allowed to participate, my belief is that everyone should have the oppurtunity (including prisoners) to help make this decision and should be all but forced to do so. Like I said, this is above politics, so Johova's Witnesses really can't pull the religion card here. If someone can understand the question: 'Should Bermuda go independent or not?' they should be made to vote on it.

The problem with independence, in regard to Bermuda though, is about pros and cons. Historically, nations have gone independent because of something more important than an arrogant leader's belief that he's such a good leader and that his country is doin so well under him to justify a larger country watching over us. They have gone independent becauase economically they are suffering (we aren't), they are being denied civil liberties - like the right to vote etc. (we most certainly aren't) and very often because they believe that their growth as a nation is being inhibited by colonialism (this couldn't be farther from the case in Bermuda). We simply don't fit the traditional criteria for severing constitutional ties with 'the motherland' if you like.

As I'm sure you're aware, recently there was an offer by the Jamaican Prime Minister of assistance on the subject of independence. Sadly, Alex Scott seems to be enthusiastic about changing Bermuda towards a Jamaican-type system.. but lets not go there. He said (the Jamaican PM) that Bermuda could learn from the mistakes of his country, which is certainly no exageration. However, I believe that all their mistakes could be avoided using traditional Bermudian common sense. Oddly, there is one exception: GOING INDEPENDENT! Bermudians don't seem to realize that this was Jamaica's biggest mistake and one that we could certainly learn from, by not doing it.

It's like quitting a job because you are certain that you will get another, better paying one. To you're suprise and horror, you don't get that job and naturally you turn back to your first employer who no longer wants anything to do with you. That is a perfect analogy for Bermuda and independence right now. The grass is always greener from the other side, isn't it?

Independence is an issue that needs to be approached with extreme caution. It can be done, but it needs to be done extremely carefully: with a national discussion and by a non-political process. It is (please excuse the use of yet another analogy) very much like j-walking, you have to wait for the right time and when all the conditions are right. That is not now, we face a changing economy; why disrupt this transition by delivering a bombshell to the already fragile political system?

It is my worry that Bermudians do not realize the implications of independence. There is nothing that they personally want that can be gained from independence; they are really not stupid enought to believe taht on the day of independence, affordable housing will start appearing left right and center. Further more, there is not a nationalistic sentimentr in Bermuda, nothing that would motivate Bermudians in general to get involved in this process. The only people who I see actively participating are those few who have motives for going independent (or not) and a handfull of intelectuals. The closest thing we have to nationalism in Bermuda is a sentiment amongst the black community to see redemption and to take the power away from the whites (Derrick Burgess- Renee Webb doctrine). It is my belief that the PLP will use this to push their own agenda in the case for independence, and this simply cannot be allowed.

Another question that should be asked is: Will the voting age for any vote on the issue be lowered slightly so anybody over 16 can take part. I personally am not quite old enough to vote yet, and I would not like to be excluded in such an important event should it take place in the next 11 months.

[Bryant Trew on 17.04.04 at 16:06]

"Here's another thought. Voting in a referendum regarding independence should be manditory. That's right, you have to vote by law, turn out has to be 100% or the result is null and void."

Right, I totally buy into what Ross has said, but the above is plain old absurd. Sorry if it was meant to be humour.

[BDA JOE on 17.04.04 at 18:50]

How so?

[BDA JOE on 17.04.04 at 18:51]

How so? Voting is manditory in places like Australia for elections and referendums. Why not here?

[Ken on 18.04.04 at 07:36]

I have met Bermudians, black and white over the years, and as a UK citizen I feel I have nothing in common with them, and they have nothing in common with me. As far as I'm concerned, Bermuda is just a bit of North America that drives on the left. I feel more at home in Gibraltar (which drives on the right).

Sure, keep the Queen as head of state if and when you become independent, but being British is meaningless. At the very least, the relationship should be changed from that of 'Overseas Territory', which is just a PC euphemism for colony, to that of Associated State.

Some Empire nostalgics in the so-called 'motherland' think that Bermuda should be to the UK was Guadeloupe is to France, an integral part of the metropolis. I rather suspect that Bermudians would laugh fruitcakes like that out of court.

[Bryant Trew on 18.04.04 at 14:49]

"...turn out has to be 100% or the result is null and void."

C'mon - that part is absurd.

[BDA JOE on 18.04.04 at 17:26]

It only seems absurd to those who are scared of not being allowed to ignore the democratic process and be ignorant and unbothered about Bermuda's future.

Because indpeendence will affect us more than any election to determine a goverment ever will, we all need to agree on it. Fortunately we live in a society where such a feat is not impossible.

[Rich Ambrosio on 18.04.04 at 17:51]

I am hesitant about any kind of poll, be it a referendum or general election, being used as a SOLE decider for whether or not to go independent.

Here is something that I posted some time ago, regarding the Canadian experience with the Quebec sovereignty referendum in 1995:

"The federalist side, a few weeks prior to the referendum was up in the Polls by 20%. But then the charismatic Lucien Bouchard took over, was hospitalised, and the sovereigntist side lost only by a handful of votes in the end."

Lucien Bouchard, at the time, was the leader of the Federal Bloc Québécois. Prior to him becoming the de facto leader of the "yes" side, then Premier of Quebec, Jacques Parizeau, was the side's official leader. He was unpopular and this reflected in the "yes" side's poor performance in polls prior to the vote. The same such occurrence can be seen in the federalist side when then PM, Jean Chrétien was advised to play a low profile role because of his unpopularity in Quebec.

What also played an important role in seeing such a shift in support was the continual muddling of what "sovereignty" meant (specifically "sovereignty-association" and economic union). Both sides were throwing to the electorate different meanings of what the referendum result would entail, and misrepresentations of what the other side said.

I can certainly envisage such confusions occurring in a Bermudian context. I can see the pro-Independence side overtly hinting at "Associated Sovereignty" as a means to make independence more politically palatable for very soft-core nationalists. Or the anti- side throwing around accusations of "Caricom"ification.

This is what would make me comfortable about the entire process of independence:

1) An initial poll granting the government the mandate to even consider independence or to negotiate with Britain, how our relationship will be composed, post-independence.

2) Negotiations with the UK to establish a firm understanding of what we can get post-constitutional change. Of primary concern is to establish a definition of what "independence" constitutes, to prevent the kind of politicking that can occur (and to avoid the ambiguity that surrounded the Quebec experience). We would also have to determine if the option of "associated-sovereignty" would be made available because the UK's position on this has constantly shifted on this since the 1970s.

3) A long, and exhaustive, period of consultation to actually create the system that we want. Bryant's article (http://www.bermudasun.bm/archives/2004-01-16/02Opinion02), referred to on the forum earlier, envisages a neutral body, which would be a good model to carry out this process.

4) In parallel to this process, new symbols for an independent Bermuda would be developed to avert any future crisis should we go independent.

5) The recommendations of the afore-mentioned body (including a draft constitution and new flag, etc) would normally be subjected to parliamentary scrutiny and vote. Personally, after having listened to many lacklustre and pisspoor HoA debates and sitting in and witnessing the childishness of our MPs in session, I have no faith in our Parliament as an institution for important issues and would prefer to bypass this stage altogether, and have the Bermudian people decide in a referendum. Quite frankly, many of our MPs are worthless.

6) Finally, everything resulting from this process would be presented to the people for final approval. Hopefully, by this point in time, a good consensus can be had.

--------
Hmm. That was a long post. Time to go watch Kill Bill Vol. 2 again. Fine piece of movie.

[BDA JOE on 18.04.04 at 17:54]

I don't think we should model our independence process after any other one. We should create it based on what's best for Bermuda.

[Rich Ambrosio on 18.04.04 at 18:07]

This isn't someone else's model.

Rather it is a model built upon what NOT to do, based on the experiences of others, vis-à-vis Bermuda's cicurmstances.

[BDA JOE on 18.04.04 at 20:33]

My apologies.

[Bryant Trew on 18.04.04 at 21:38]

"It only seems absurd to those who are scared of not being allowed to ignore the democratic process and be ignorant and unbothered about Bermuda's future."

To clarify - saying that 100% turnout is required or else the referendum is null and void is absurd. On what planet could any decision be made if 100% turnout is required? Or perhaps that's your point when it comes to independence.

"Because indpeendence will affect us more than any election to determine a goverment ever will..."

How do you know that? Can you see into the future? I have no idea of whether or not independence will be a good or a bad thing. Actually, I'm of the opinion that independence itself is irrelevant to Bermuda's potential demise. You could change tax policy tomorrow, and we would be broke. You could legalise hard core drugs tomorrow, and we would be overrun by drug lords by the weekend. We could destroy tourism this season by merely allowing our crime rate to triple.

Bermuda could be destroyed with or without independence. All it takes is Bermudians to do something really stupid. Tell me: Exactly how does our colonial status prevent us from destroying this country? What is this magical degree of security you are so concerned about losing?

[BDA JOE on 19.04.04 at 20:05]

Bryant, I respect your opinions, and I really believe that you are one of the most intelligent contributers to this site.

However I would suggest that perhaps you read my posts in their entirerty, or take a closer look at them.First of all, mandatory voting is nothing new. It has been used in Australia, Greece and the former Soviet Union.

Second, the things that you mentioned that could very well mess up Bermuda (like altering tax laws etc.) were legislative changes. I said that independece is something that could change Bermuda more than any election could (an election being the only other thing we could vote on).

[Bryant Trew on 19.04.04 at 23:11]

I don't have a problem with mandatory voting. i have a problem with making a decision null and void if you don't get 100% voter turnout.

Re your second point, IMO it is legislative and policy changes that will decide Bermuda's future - not independence itself. Whether you could vote on it or not is not the concern, because the power to do damage to Bermuda is present both before and after the vote.

[The Limey on 20.04.04 at 14:20]

Tony Blair has finally given in and agreed that the UK will get a referendum on the EU constitution.

Let's hope the opposition and public here can achieve the same feat and extract an independence referendum from Alex Scott.

[Paul on 20.04.04 at 15:23]

I agree that Bermuda's independence is an issue that should be decided upon by referendum, but I don't think that the debate over the EU constitution is a valid comparison: whether or not a new constitution is adopted is not an issue touching upon national sovereignty, since the UK is only part of the EU as a result of an Act of the UK parliament. Technically, the UK parliament is still supreme over the EU, therefore.