Back in 2003, following the General Election, the Progressive Labour Party found itself in the middle of a leadership crisis.

Despite winning the election under Jennifer Smith, a group of 11 PLP MPs moved against her leadership. What followed was a struggle over who would take over, and after a stalemate, Alex Scott eventually emerged as the compromise candidate. He became leader of the PLP and Premier of Bermuda, with Ewart Brown becoming his deputy.

Fast forward to 2026, and maybe a compromise is exactly what the PLP needs again.

Let me be clear. I’m not a member of the PLP, so I don’t have a vote in this leadership election. Truthfully, this is a decision for the people who belong to the party. But my ears work, my eyes work, and I’m privy to conversations with people who do have a stake in what happens. What I’ve heard from some people is interesting.

I’ve heard people say they’re supporting Curtis Dickinson not necessarily because he’s their preferred choice, but because they simply can’t bring themselves to support Jason Hayward. I’ve heard others say they’re supporting Jason Hayward because they believe they’re protecting the PLP from what they see as an attempt by people associated with Curtis Dickinson’s campaign to change the makeup and direction of the party.

Those are individual perspectives, and I wouldn’t pretend they represent every PLP member. But if there’s a meaningful number of people who feel that way, maybe it’s bigger than whether Curtis Dickinson or Jason Hayward should win. Maybe it’s whether either of them can bring the party back together afterward.

We’ve watched this leadership contest spill into court, delay the party’s annual conference and create very public disagreements over membership, delegates and the rules governing the process. Both candidates have publicly expressed concern about the division within the party. That brings me back to what happened in 2003.

Maybe the PLP needs to revisit its own history. What if Curtis Dickinson and Jason Hayward were brought to the table and asked to consider whether there’s someone else they could both support. Someone who may not currently be seeking the leadership. Someone both sides believe could provide stability. Someone capable of bringing together the different factions of the party while leading the country through the transition. I understand that’s probably a long shot.

I’ve also heard privately that ego is playing a significant role in how at least one candidate is approaching this contest. I can’t independently verify that, so I’m not presenting it as fact. Politics is competitive, and people who run for leadership generally do so because they genuinely believe they’re the right person for the job. But leadership also requires knowing when something has become bigger than you.

If both Curtis Dickinson and Jason Hayward genuinely believe the interests of their party and Bermuda come before their own political ambitions, there’s nothing wrong with asking whether compromise should at least be considered.

That doesn’t mean either man is incapable of leading. It doesn’t mean PLP members shouldn’t be allowed to choose between them. It also doesn’t mean repeating what happened in 2003 would automatically solve the problems the party faces today. But history sometimes provides options worth considering.

The PLP isn’t just choosing the person who will lead its organization. As the governing party, its leadership decision will determine who becomes Bermuda’s next Premier. That’s why what happens internally has consequences beyond Alaska Hall.

There’s a country that needs to be governed. There are serious issues around the cost of living, housing, education, healthcare, crime, our workforce and Bermuda’s economic future that aren’t going to disappear while a political party works through its internal disagreements.

Maybe Curtis Dickinson emerges from this and leads a united PLP. Maybe Jason Hayward does. Or maybe, like 2003, the best way forward isn’t either of the people currently fighting for the job. Maybe it’s someone they can both agree on.