Kim Swan's motion of no confidence against Premier Ewart Brown's Government failed to get support even from Dr. Brown's fiercest Progressive Labour Party critics — and two of Mr. Swan's United Bermuda Party colleagues. The Opposition Leader speaks to TIM SMITH about why he hoped the motion would succeed, and why it didn't.

Kim Swan describes himself as 'the first among equals' and that, he says, is the big difference between him and Premier Ewart Brown.

After the Premier went behind his Cabinet's back to bring four Guantánamo Bay detainees to Bermuda, Mr. Swan responded with a course of action he at least thought had the full backing of his United Bermuda Party team.

To say the UBP Leader's motion of no confidence in Dr. Brown's Government didn't go exactly according to plan might be understating things.

Mr. Swan was frustrated, but not shocked, when the motion won no backing from disgruntled Government MPs on a three line whip — but he was as surprised as anyone when two of his own MPs refused to support it.

The UBP had been discussing the motion right up to the morning of the 14-hour House of Assembly debate which could have ended Dr. Brown's spell as Premier.

Even though by then it seemed highly unlikely Progressive Labour Party members were going to vote for it under threat of expulsion, Mr. Swan says the Opposition decided to go for it anyway.

"I had some idea prior," he tells The Royal Gazette. "I communicated that to my colleagues. We collectively agreed that it was important that we bring our motion of no confidence to the House.

"Notwithstanding the feeling that it might be difficult as the day came upon us, we had a job to present a very serious case.

"We agreed. The motion was a collective approach. I'm the first among equals. I'm a team player. And that's what this is all about. Dr. Brown didn't even consult with his own colleagues when he brought the detainees to Bermuda."

Judging by the tone of his voice, Mr. Swan is still very angry with the Premier for breaking the Constitution by failing to get permission from the Governor for the Guantánamo move. Dr. Brown has claimed he thought he only needed permission from Immigration Minister David Burch.

"It's not an immigration issue," insists Mr. Swan. "He has to know that. He has to know that! For it to have taken place with the amount of secrecy that's existed with it — he's had every opportunity to have shared this with colleagues. He could have done that right up until the last minute. It happened on Thursday morning. There's Cabinet on Tuesday.

"We have to take it very seriously. I think the fact he didn't inform these people indicated he knew he was in the wrong. To bypass so many who needed to know."

Under the Constitution, motions of no confidence cannot be brought against individuals — meaning the UBP had to table the motion against Dr. Brown's Government and hope PLP MPs would effectively vote against their own party.

An alternative would have been to push for a motion of censure against the Premier. This may have had more of a chance of passing, although it would not have seen the Premier kicked out of office.

But surely a successful motion of censure would have been better than a failed motion of confidence?

"Hindsight is always 20/20," argues Mr. Swan. "Who's to say that a motion of censure would have passed? And if it did it would not have the impact of a motion of no confidence.

"This is the first time Bermuda has had the opportunity to consider such a serious motion as this. I think that in itself is a significant exercise for us.

"The Premier's actions were endorsed by a vote in favour, but if you take an analysis of as many persons that felt it necessary to speak the way they did, you would see a different picture."

He maintains the Premier is not off the hook.

"The issue hasn't been totally dealt with yet," he says. "I certainly feel it's our opportunity as an Opposition with the concerns of the people of Bermuda, that this particular issue will not go away.

"There's nothing to prevent anyone from bringing a motion of censure at some point over time — from either side of the House. There's the British Government that has a stake in it. Through our parliamentary questions and parliamentary questions overseas."

In the run-up to the debate, the Opposition stated it was cautiously optimistic of pinching the five PLP votes it needed to win, even though backbenchers were openly concerned over the wording of the motion.

"There was some expressed disquiet on the floor of the House," explains Mr. Swan.

"The support came in spoken word in the end and didn't materialise in affirmation. I believe it was the threat of expulsion — the three line whip — that made a difference. Persons spoke very forcefully against what had happened. At the end of the day their vote didn't reflect how they expressed themselves."

Mr. Swan's hopes took a turn for the worse when UBP MP Darius Tucker championed Dr. Brown as a go-getter, vowed to vote against the motion and then disappeared into the coffee room instead of voting; while Shadow Attorney General Mark Pettingill abstained, claiming the motion had been drafted by PLP backbenchers.

Mr. Tucker later quit the party and Mr. Pettingill was suspended from the whip for three months.

Mr. Swan declines to comment at length on Mr. Pettingill, and says of his claims about the motion: "There's been some dialogue but I'm not going to get into the nuts and bolts. It's my motion. I consulted widely."

Regarding Mr. Tucker, he says: "I was disappointed. I feel for my colleagues as well as a consequence of that. I don't want to speculate on why Mr. Tucker didn't support his colleagues and let his colleagues and constituents down in the way he did. That's certainly a matter for him to deal with."

Asked about the UBP's credibility given its inability to even get all its team to vote, Mr. Swan replies: "As a political party we are going to work very hard to focus on making ourselves the alternative Government that this country needs. Sometimes when you have a setback it presents you an opportunity to rebound and come back stronger.

"The one thing that this situation has shown us is that we certainly need to be together as a team and make sure that you cover your colleagues.

"As a party we are looking at how we can make our organisation function even more effectively from the ground up. We are looking at reform as to how we can make ourselves even more dynamic.

"Our numbers are less. We all have to carry a greater load but the challenge is on us to pick up the mantle and be equally as effective."

The latest opinion poll puts Mr. Swan's favourability rating at 39 percent, while a UBP-commissioned survey says most people wouldn't choose him as their preferred leader.

"I'm here to serve," he says. "I waited 25 years to get in the House and I serve the people of St. George's West. I serve as leader for my party at the pleasure of my parliamentary colleagues. It's a job I enjoy doing and I will do it to the best of my ability.

"Whilst I'm here I'm going to do the best to move this country and my political party forward."