What is great about Facebook is that people have to use their real names and/or faces in order to have a conversation or debate. Even if you disagree on any given issue, at least you know who you are talking to. Ironically, very often people actually meet in person and become friends who see beyond differences of opinion.

People should be willing to stand on their convictions or ideologies and if not persuade others, at the very least, to articulate what forms their perspectives. Quite frankly, if someone is not able, prepared or even willing to debate their points in public, they should rethink being involved in political debates or politics altogether.

Huddled masses

In every developed country, the issues of immigration, migration and emigration are ever-evolving. In Britain, the European Union and the United States, this topic is central in the minds of both citizens and those seeking to become residents or citizens.

The logistics may differ from country to country.

In Britain, legal migrants from countries such as India, Hong Kong and Ukraine make up the bulk of those granted residency. In places such as Denmark and Germany, the respective governments are rolling out legislation and policies to reduce the social benefits given to recent residents. Over in Italy, the far-right government has gone one step farther by attempting to move those seeking asylum to Albania.

No matter the country, there are two common factors at play:

• Significant proportions of the citizens of those countries are expressing displeasure

• Various political parties are putting forth their policies on immigration based on the social climate

As a prime example, in Britain the Conservatives have rushed legislation through parliament in an effort to appear to be getting tough on immigration.

Closer to home, the One Bermuda Alliance is once again bringing up the issue of immigration, with this recent statement by my talk-show cohost, the senator Dwayne Robinson: “The OBA has always advocated for immigration reform and a clear route to Bermudian status…”

Point of order

History will show that the OBA rejected any form of bipartisan immigration reform while in government and, predictably, under the command of Michael Fahy attempted to rush through Pathways to Status in 2016. Subsequent to its two election losses, the OBA has never presented an opposition Bill on immigration reform.

In reality, both then and now, it has advocated only for “...a clear route to Bermudian status”.

One wonders exactly which polling data did the OBA gain that told it granting status is the wish of the majority of the Bermudian electorate? Or was it Michael Fahy wielding his influence once again?

The OBA now has painted itself into a corner in which it has to articulate beyond one-line sentences its full immigration proposals. Either that or pull back and attempt to say this was “just the opinion of one person”, not the whole group.

Nevertheless, at least now as a country we have an opportunity to have both private and public conversations and debates on the various aspects of touchy issues such as work permits, residency and, yes, status.

We must thank Mr Robinson for bringing this topic to the public.

• Christopher Famous is the government MP for Devonshire East (Constituency 11). You can reach him on WhatsApp at 599-0901 or e-mail at carib_pro@yahoo.com