I read Glenn Fubler’s article titled “Letter to Margaret Carter”. It was an interesting opinion coming from Mr Fubler, the meaning of which needs some introspection. His letter was more than an update or post-partum gathering of the mentioned deceased; he was saying much more.

There is a scriptural phrase, “I have lived a lifetime among you”, spoken by a prophet who laid his life as evidence of his character. Mr Fubler is now a senior citizen, who from his youth has been an advocate for social redress.

His recollections of involvement with the Black Berets or the anti-apartheid movement are only nuggets of what those of my generation and beyond would know of a young man possessed with ideas of Black liberation. Not only has Mr Fubler been consistent through the years since as a teenager, but he is also reasonably well-educated, articulate and good with the pen.

The logical question is, why is it when considering national leaders that Glen Fubler’s name and others who are as deserving are never mentioned or in consideration. The answer is very simple, but speaks to the illogic of our political system and its present constraints.

Despite the appearance of two political parties, the actual political structure is very closed. Unlike in the United States where people and popular sentiments can be reflected in leadership choices, in Bermuda, there can be generations without any ideological change.

I can recall somewhere around the late 1970s or early 1980s, Julian Hall, Glenn Fubler and others knocking on the leadership doors of the Progressive Labour Party insisting the baton be passed on to a new generation of leaders. However, when Geoffrey Bing and that late Sixties crew wrote the PLP constitution, they had large continents with millions of people in mind, not 21 square miles where people can know almost everyone.

Bermuda and its small population are more suited to direct democracy rather than a system of delegates where meaningful and substantive motions are made through the delegates and not the full membership. The dilemma in addition to delegates is that there is a candidate selection committee. This committee almost ensures that persons such as Glenn Fubler never make it even as a candidate — because first loyalty must always be to the party and truth is relative to the party position.

If ever indeed it can be organised so that a population can be mobilised through its popular arguments and sentiments, while not perfect, that is when change is likely and possible.

Just apply a little thought and question ourselves: of all the leaders in front of us at present, has any passed any reasonable test for public trust?

If we use as a gold standard the statement “I have lived a lifetime among you”, where would our leaders place?

There are speculations about a possible successor to David Burt as premier. Walter Roban’s name has been floated; Wayne Caines, too. But if we applied the gold standard question, would either place near the category of a Glenn Fubler? Neither has the background but more important is the issue of integrity. Where were they heading during their development years? We know which way Glenn Fubler was heading.

If the PLP's broad constituency recognises its dilemma and lack of real choices, then maybe it can fix it at grassroots level. In real terms, who determines those having a seat in Parliament? Isn’t it the electorate?

If the central committee wants Joe, but it is known by the general electorate or support base that Margaret is better, unseat Joe. Why blindly support the central committee? The people have the power to put whomever they believe best and fittest to serve in Parliament. The time has long passed when we should have abandoned what amounts to a cult guiding the masses.

Mr Fubler’s letter was to Margaret but there are many of her contemporaries still present. That letter was meant as a call to all of those voices that have become silent over the years. Your country needs your voice now more than anytime in its past.