The Progressive Labour Party has postponed its Annual General Conference, which was scheduled for October 28th through 30th, as the internal leadership battle between Curtis Dickinson and Jason Hayward continues to play out. This situation is absolutely messy. But maybe, just maybe, this mess is exactly what Bermuda needs.

In the meantime, since the ruling party is having difficulty figuring out how it wants to choose its next leader, maybe we should just let the Governor take over. I mean, after all, we’re a British Overseas Territory, the Governor represents the King, so Governor, you’re the next man up. I’m joking, people. Maybe not. But seriously, watching how this leadership race has unfolded has been fascinating to me.

I have no dog in this fight. I’m not a PLP member. I have very little faith in politicians regardless of how the media, their campaigns or their supporters sell them to me. So when all is said and done, whoever becomes the next leader of the PLP and Premier of Bermuda won’t be determined by what I think.

What interests me is how people are viewing these two men. There appears to be a great deal of public enthusiasm around Curtis Dickinson. People speak about his banking career, his experience on Wall Street, his time as Minister of Finance and his repeated emphasis on integrity.

Then there’s Jason Hayward. I’ve heard people criticize the way he speaks. I’ve heard him referred to as a union thug. I’ve heard people question his academic background, his credibility and whether he’s capable of getting Bermuda “back on the right track,” whatever that means. I’ve also heard people describe him as Burt 2.0 and suggest that David Burt would somehow continue pulling the strings.

The contrast is interesting. It reminds me somewhat of the conversations we used to hear about Marc Bean. People questioned whether he was too “ghetto” and whether he could appropriately represent Bermuda. Then David Burt came along and, to some people, appeared more acceptable. Interesting, right?

But anyway, back to 2026. The current dispute isn’t just about whether someone likes Curtis Dickinson or Jason Hayward. It’s about the rules governing who becomes a member, who can become a delegate and ultimately who gets to participate in selecting the next leader.

Mr. Dickinson has taken the matter to court and obtained an interim injunction preventing the disputed changes from being implemented while the underlying issue is considered. His position is that the changes conflict with the PLP’s constitution. The party leadership disputes that interpretation. That’s where I find myself asking a different question. At what point do you accept that maybe an organization no longer represents you?

I’ve heard the arguments about new members joining the PLP. I don’t fault anyone for joining an organization if the existing rules allow them to do so. Organizations evolve as do political parties. New generations join and eventually influence their direction. But there’s also a legitimate conversation about the difference between evolving an organization and fundamentally changing what that organization represents. That’s really for PLP members to decide.

What I find fascinating is that Mr. Dickinson is now in court against officials of the very political organization he wants to lead. Maybe he’s completely justified in believing he’s fighting to protect the party’s constitution. Maybe those supporting the party’s position genuinely believe they’re protecting the integrity and traditions of the organization. The court will ultimately determine the legal questions before it.

But politically and philosophically, I think there’s another question worth asking. If your differences with an organization have become so significant that you’re fighting its leadership in court for the right to determine how its next leader is selected, is that still the organization you should be trying to lead?

Maybe it is. Maybe fighting from within is exactly how organizations change. Or maybe there comes a point when walking away requires more courage than continuing to fight for control of something you no longer appear aligned with.

Marc Bean eventually created the Free Democratic Movement. Dame Pamela Gordon and Patricia Gordon-Pamplin took different political paths to what most people expected them to due to their family background. 

So if Curtis Dickinson genuinely believes there’s a different political direction Bermuda needs, there are options beyond becoming leader of the PLP. He could become independent. He could create something new. He could take his ideas directly to Bermuda and allow voters to decide whether they support them. That just might be that’s what makes this entire situation bigger than Curtis Dickinson or Jason Hayward.

Political parties aren’t simply vehicles for winning elections. They’re supposed to represent certain values, philosophies and principles. People should be able to disagree within them, challenge their leadership and push them to evolve. But how far can those differences go before you’re no longer changing the organization and instead trying to turn it into something fundamentally different? That’s the part of this leadership battle that interests me.

For the record, I’ve previously said that I believe David Burt has been the worst Premier in my lifetime. My position hasn’t changed. So this isn’t me defending David Burt, Jason Hayward, Curtis Dickinson or the PLP. I’m perfectly comfortable choosing none of them.

Which brings me back to where I started. Governor, you’re the next man up. It’s time to serve the King. Oh, and the people of Bermuda.

https://www.modernghana.com/news/1206874/i-will-never-forget-what-a-white-man-told-me-in.html