AFTER reading Sir John Swan's latest cover-the-waterfront meanderings on Bermuda's political and social culture in and the , one of the few things I found myself in agreement with was his contention that Dr. Grant Gibbons should not be leading the United Bermuda Party.

The Gibbonses make for good Finance Ministers; that's a given.

But they are not very successful at attracting the popular vote. Witness the fact that Dr. Gibbons, a highly intelligent man with all of the warmth and charisma of a sand crab, his weak UBP campaign committee plus their peculiar American consultant Charles Hallimir (who reports is now working for the Rev. Al Sharpton's vanity Presidential campaign) managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory at the General Election in July.

I have noticed that when there is some particularly pointed example of political stupidity in Bermuda, the Opinion will occasionally draw an analogy with Nicholas Monsarrat's classic book about the decolonisation period, .

But I think in view of Sir John's recent statements and his clear agenda for reviving Independence ? either on his own terms as leader of a re-Swanised UBP or in a pact of convenience with Alex Scott's Progressive Labour Party ? it would be more appropriate to refer to Monsarrat's sequel, .

The book opens with the celebrations surrounding a small island's Independence.

The new Prime Minister begins with the very highest principles but betrays his better instincts for the delights of power ? his idealism swamped by a flood of credit from dubious foreign sources, the scapegoating of minority populations for temporary political gain, the dawning realisation that his glorified village-state can never be more than a pawn on a global chessboard dominated by political, military and industrial behemoths.

The novel ends with a steady drift towards bankruptcy, corruption and chaos.

Clearly the same type of scenario is already beginning to take shape here with Independence being exploited (again!) as a highly emotive distraction to Bermuda's very real problems ? not the solution to these same structural weaknesses. If Monsarrat were to have chronicled what's taking place in Bermuda at the moment, he might well have titled his account

Sir John, for reasons that are not entirely clear, has chosen to give his stamp of approval to the chaotic process now under way ? one that might well lead to Independence but which will do nothing to resolve many (if any) of the problems that the former Premier has catalogued in his recent comments.

What has prompted the apparent sea-change in Sir John's thinking? I do not have a definitive answer. But over the years I have noticed that when Sir John makes public statements he usually has more up his sleeve than his arm.

Example number one: When he convinced the Progressive Labour Party that the island needed a "Black Bank", got his charter and promptly turned around and sold it to that "White" Bank of Bermuda for millions of dollars. It is amusing but sad that the Bank of Bermuda at that time was prepared to do anything to stop the introduction of another bank, particularly one with American connections ? and is today trying to sell their whole institution to HSBC. No wonder the people have such little trust in politicians and businessmen.

Example number two: He is now concerned about race relations (as we all should be) but he represented the whitest constituency in Bermuda throughout his political career and was Premier for 13 years. He had plenty of time and opportunity to develop some solutions with his "vision thing" to this vexing problem.

Example number three: He speaks of the need for black leadership and I agree. But according to David Gibbons' book John Swan was instrumental in blocking Jim Woolridge's elevation to the post of Premier in 1977 and instead manufactured Sir David as leader in 1977.

Example number four: Instead of confining his criticisms of the UBP leadership to Dr. Grant Gibbons, Sir John makes a blanket attack on a prostrate UBP, insulting virtually all the people who worked hard to develop and unite Bermuda over the last 35 years. He courageously kicks his own party when it is on its knees. A party which served him very well. And when he speaks of divisions and disarray within the UBP, he is partially responsible for the creation of these same schisms. Because his stubborn adventure to force Independence on a populace that could see no real benefit (if you can't convince them confuse them) followed by a protracted attempt to secure a hamburger franchise was the beginning of the unravelling of the UBP.

Example number five: Prior to the last election he ran a high-profile media campaign, I suspect hoping to create a groundswell of popular support that would lead to him being drafted to return to power in the UBP, attacking the PLP on any number of fronts. Many of his criticisms were valid. But his campaign fizzled out ? the UBP lost the ensuing General Election and now Sir John has done a U- turn, leaping praise on Premier Alex Scott and the same PLP he was flagellating just a few months ago. I hope the new Premier will not succumb to these gross flatteries and dubious manoeuvrings. I am sure that Alex Scott will recall what President Dwight Eisenhower cautioned about political sycophants: "Sweet praise is like perfume ? it's fine if you don't swallow it."

Ultimately, I think it is safe to conclude that Sir John Swan did not tacitly endorse the PLP Government for nothing ? clearly he wants something from this Government, something to suit either his political or business agenda. What that something is remains to be seen.

Sir John's pronouncements and motivations are never easy analyse. Sometimes he makes good sense; sometimes what he comes out with is sheer nonsense. Separating the wheat from the chaff can be an infuriating exercise when it comes to Sir John because his statements are usually either all wheat or all chaff.

With apologies to Churchill, I can only surmise that on his bad days Sir John can best be described as one of those orators who, before they get up, do not know what they are going to say, when they are speaking, do not know what they are saying, and, when they have sat down do not know what they have said.

Keeping up with Sir John's quicksilver outbursts of rhetoric in recent days has been like trying to read while my wife is turning the pages. Images and text flash by, you catch glimpses of interesting and tantalising things, there are some things you would like to stop and study ? but ultimately there is no satisfaction.

None at all.