Dear Sir,

I was utterly fascinated by Cheryl Pooley’s opinion of June 27. It contained a number of inaccurate statements about the mistakes of both the One Bermuda Alliance and the Progressive Labour Party. The statement that stuck out the most, though, was her expectation that women would be elevated in Bermuda politics.

Perhaps Ms Pooley is unaware of the verbal abuse that Toni Daniels experienced during the Constituency 31 by-election? Maybe she is unaware of the misogynistic radio interview, when young women of the OBA were accused of using “the lowest common denominator” to obtain career advancement? Surely she must be aware of how women should expect to be given “street talk” when a man wishes to speak “man to woman”? Or perhaps not.

While optimism is a very positive personality trait, it must not lead to rewriting history or simply being unrealistic. As far as I can recall, not a single PLP MP spoke out during multiple instances of misogynistic behaviour in the PLP. Or if they did, it was done in the most general of terms so as not to cause the party any real embarrassment.

This failure to speak out points to a larger, fundamental PLP problem, which transcends the mistreatment of women. Time and time again, it has been shown that the PLP protects the party first. It is its greatest strength, but also its greatest weakness because it puts Bermudians second. Just as we heard silence after one woman after another was attacked, we have heard silence after instances of poor governance. The natural consequence, of course, is more poor conduct.

As we reflect upon the PLP’s five years as the Opposition, I ask this: if the PLP failed to hold its MPs accountable in Opposition, why would you think that it would hold them accountable when it is back in power? Shouldn’t it have to demonstrate accountability while in Opposition before it is given the opportunity to govern again?

BRYANT TREW

Sandys