The subject and question is, how can we bring changes to the Bermuda Parliament? I can recall somewhere around the early 1990s that question must have been lingering on the minds of a few people in the United Bermuda Party. One such person, Ward Young, as I recall, put a written public appeal asking persons to come in and, listen to this, “Take over the party and make it yours.”

Mr Young was calling for fresh blood, new ideas and new ways of doing things. Did his effort work? No, but it did kick-start a new group called “The Under Forties”, which had a level of vibrancy. But, up against the wall of a party that was supported by the banks and major law and accountant firms, this new enthusiasm was merely accommodated as the conservative and older element of the party rolled on.

That call by Mr Young was what assisted my decision to join at the time. The measurable achievements of my efforts that reached Parliament, aside from human rights issues, affected the way that major capital projects were assigned.

Chief example: CedarBridge Academy was given as project management to a company mandated to subcontract to smaller firms. I had worked on another major initiative, which gained the ear of David Saul but morphed into the terminology “economic development zone” and the ideas associated with it being neutered before reaching Parliament.

Invariably, changing the Parliament means changing the way the ruling party views its function and the role of the party. The Progressive Labour Party has had its share of internal pulls for a new direction, but has historically shown less tolerance for dissent. Typically, the PLP hierarchy expels dissenters, which makes the present challengers’ prospects grim and a change in Parliament a non-starter coming from the party.

The new party by Marc Bean has chosen an ideology that is far Right of centre when most of the world of progressive governments have shifted towards the Left. The Free Democratic Movement has not advocated any systemic change to how the Parliament will function.

If there is a demand for change, it exists only in the minds of a substantial portion of the electorate. There will never be a referendum on the question of change; therefore, the only way the electorate can bring change is to select a slate of change agents as candidates.

It is coincidental that Sir John Swan happens to be right on point with the existing need. However, it’s a tall effort that is being asked when considering opening up the way Parliament functions. The need is for genuine change agents and not simple political opportunists.

Clarity of purpose that shows the benefits of a more participatory electorate is essential. This need existed whether or not Sir John rose to the occasion. Whether they stand as independents or as a group, the common value should be based on the development of consensus through truth and reason.

A change inspired by the electorate is the best possible hope for Bermuda. It has been 60 years since the public rose and caused a change to the political system. Those changes then were short-sighted and led to the marginalisation we live with today.

If we want to bring an end to “runaway leaders” and aspiring autocrats, the electorate needs to use the polls to advance change.