United Bermuda Party MPs yesterday carried out the first boycott of the Throne Speech in history to protest Government's planned constitutional changes, which they fear could lead to a "dictatorship''.

Premier Jennifer Smith later branded the move "disrespectful'' to the Governor and the Queen, and reminded the UBP MPs they took an oath to be "Her Majesty's loyal opposition''.

The 14 Opposition MPs remained in the House of Assembly while Governor Thorold Masefield read the Throne Speech to Government MPs and guests on the Cabinet lawn.

They held a press conference afterwards and went home rather than attend the first session of Parliament.

Opposition Leader Pamela Gordon said: "This is not a game. It is a very serious thing and we are taking the issue seriously.

"We are talking about democracy and the potential for dictatorship. Without the checks and balances we've had before and having a viable Opposition, we are talking about the country turning to a dictatorship.

"The Opposition has a limited ability to register protest so we believe that the fundamental rights in relation to constitutional change must never be taken for granted.

"The protest must register clearly to the United Kingdom and the Government of Bermuda that we don't take this issue lightly because we are here to represent the people of Bermuda in registering our concern for the process. We have to make the point that this is not a step taken lightly by the UBP.'' C.V. (Jim) Woolridge, the UBP's longest-serving MP, said: "In 32 years I've been a member of parliament, we've never had to resort to this type of action.

"We were conscious of the need to maintain the democratic principle because only then will the people of the country have any respect for elected people.

"The PLP won in 1998, but we were also in the running, and although we got 14 seats, we represent 48 percent of the electorate, and they have indicated to us last night (at the public meeting) that they are deeply concerned about the attempt to railroad constitutional changes without the consultation of the voters and Johnny Public.'' Gordon defends controversial UBP boycott Responding to PLP claims the boycott could be seen as disrespectful to the Governor and the Queen, Ms Gordon said: "It was never the intention of us to show disrespect.

"But it is very clear for us to show concern on behalf of the people of this country whose rights seem to be eroding in relation to constitutional change.

"I hope the people of this country understand and support that this is done not to show disrespect to the Governor, but to show a message to the UK and the PLP that this is an issue that we will not take lightly.

"Democracy has been hard fought for and we are not about to let it be lost.'' Referring to the UBP's public meeting on Thursday night, she said: "This was not an issue that is black or white, but people are concerned about rights and we saw these people are prepared to march on the streets if necessary to send a message to us that the Government needs to listen to the rights of the people.

"We support the principle of one man, one vote. However, we've not had one vote of equal value (and) we have people who are prepared to get out there and and acknowledge if there is a change to the constitution, they want to have a say.

"No government in the free world is given a thorough mandate to arbitrarily change the constitution without involving the people in the process.

"Even people who are presently pleased with the new government, we would say that in ten years from now they might not feel the same way and in ten years it will be too late because their rights will have been eroded. We are fighting for everyone.'' She said the Premier's concession in the Throne Speech of a public meeting on constitutional change was totally inadequate.

"One public meeting does not afford the public to have the right to have a say and participation. That's not even a caveat, its a throwaway line,'' she said.

At a press conference on Friday afternoon, Ms Smith said the boycott was "a show of great disrespect to Her Majesty the Queen and the House of Assembly.

"They were summoned to the Cabinet Office by Black Rod, who was sent by the Governor as the Queen's representative.

"In another place (Britain) it is known as the Queen's Speech, and I believe a lack of knowledge of parliamentary processes led to this.

"There are other ways one can show displeasure about an issue. As members of my party have said, they were capable of offering advice, having 35 years (in opposition) on how such displeasure can be shown.

"Having sworn an oath of allegiance to the Queen as Her Majesty's loyal opposition, it was a show of great disrespect.'' When asked if holding a public meeting on constitutional changes would meet the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's criteria of "demonstrable'' consultation, Ms Smith outlined how she had presented the proposals to the House for debate during the summer. She said people who said they were not given enough notice were ignorant of parliamentary rules and accused the Opposition of spreading misinformation.

Shadow Legislative Affairs Minister John Barritt said the UBP was keeping all its options open about future action.

"There was a great deal made about marching,'' he said. "Marching is both exercise physically and democratically. One doesn't want to embark on it willy-nilly. We will think through our options carefully, just as we have thought this through carefully.

"A public meeting is not sufficient. The people don't fully understand what's being proposed and we need to take time to explain that, which is unusual because we are not the ones who put it on the table.''