With a hurricane looming, this may seem to be the wrong time to discuss divisions within the governing Progressive Labour Party.

But there?s no doubt that there is a storm brewing, and its consequences could be as fundamental to Bermuda as being hit, God forbid, by a hurricane.

Many of the criticisms have been given voice by Julian Hall, who now seems to be positioning himself as the conscience of the party.

As Calvin Smith notes on this page, the concerns he has are shared by many grassroots members of the party and its trade union wing. To the extent that he has been criticised, it?s for airing the party?s dirty laundry in public, rather than for the dirty laundry itself.

As Mr. Smith noted, there is a certain irony in this, since it was Mr. Hall who more than 20 years ago acted as the ?prosecutor? in the party disciplinary proceedings that led to the expulsion of Mr. Smith himself along with MPs Gilbert Darrell, Austin Thomas, Lionel Simmons and Walter Brangman for criticising the leadership of the PLP.

Now it is Mr. Hall who is criticising the party leadership, albeit as an outsider since he holds no official PLP office.

Mr. Hall first aired his criticisms in rg magazine in July, and expanded on them last Friday night and on Labour Day.

Mr. Hall argued that the PLP leadership has lost touch with its labour movement roots and has become a closed shop which does not listen to criticism.

Many of Mr. Hall?s concerns centre on Pro-Active Management Systems Ltd.?s firing from the Berkeley site. Mr. Hall represents the company in its arbitration hearings with Government and has made this exhibit one in his case against the party and Government. The arbitrators will have to decide if the firing was done properly and if it was justified. There are many whose only question is why Government did not wait for Pro-Active to miss its completion deadline, as it almost certainly would have, before firing the company, but that?s another story.

Mr. Hall is more on target in his criticisms of the ?imperial Premiership? of former Premier Jennifer Smith and the ?all spin-no substance? (not his words) style of current Premier Alex Scott. It?s not just the labour movement that is disappointed with both administrations? records, or the lack thereof. All but the most dedicated members of the PLP must surely share in the disappointment.

Aside from questions of style, the disappointment stems from the lack of action on issues ranging from housing to pensions to healthcare to crime to education.

For all the talk of the Social Agenda, it is still just that: Talk. What action there has been has been reactive, and even when the action is welcome and popular, it suggests a lack of a vision and a plan, and a Government that keeps a closer eye on the headlines than anything else.

Mr. Hall?s cure for this is for the PLP to come back to its labour roots, which suggests a turn to the left. This is wrong. The PLP won power by moving to the centre, and is unlikely to retain power if it swings back to the philosophy that kept it in Opposition for 30 years. Mr. Hall will no doubt disagree with this characterisation, but what else can he mean?

The truth is that the PLP?s problems are not failures of philosophy, but failures of management and lack of ideas. Its inability to build more houses or to improve educational standards have little to do with philosophy.

It may be that the PLP, whose wounds from the overthrow of Ms Smith continue to fester, is simply exhausted and out of ideas. If that?s the case, Mr. Hall?s prescription may not cure it and renewed infighting will not help either.

At the same time, for the good of the Country, the party?s leadership needs to take a good hard look at itself and start steering what is, to all intents and purposes, a rudderless ship in a storm of the PLP?s own making.