by Georgina Wilcox

The very first meeting called by the premier to “educate the public” about the One Man, One Vote” (OMOV) referendum was held in West Bay last Monday (9) evening.

The “education” was a one way lesson in saying how he is against the OMOV concept and the “torrents of community division” in our society it will cause.  The present system “has served us well” so why change it?

Unfortunately, the education lesson did not last too long, except he did give examples of Singapore and Prince Edward Island as illustration of places that still have multiple-voting systems. I was not sure Singapore was a good reference to use.

The rally soon turned into the typical political campaign meeting we have come to expect of the “Open” meetings organised by our political parties, with the United Democratic Party (UDP) getting top honours for that.

Premier, McKeeva Bush, spent much more time criticising his opponents. He even recited some poetry (in my opinion not particularly good) about those he expects will stand against him at the next election, leaving me puzzled as to what this had to do with the OMOV education lesson I was there for.

If you vote “YES” to OMOV you are voting for the opposition he claimed. “How?” I wanted to ask. This is a vote for progress and bringing us into line with nearly all of the rest of the world. How could voting “Yes” be voting for the opposition, unless he was saying his UDP party would have less of a chance of winning next year’s election? It certainly appeared that way. Was this the main reason our premier was against the OMOV?

His claim if they [his constituents] stuck by him, he would stick by them seemed to add to my concern over this. He accused the supporters of the OMOV of seeking power. My concern was now getting bigger. None of this had anything to do with my “education” of the two political voting systems.

Mr. Bush pleaded with the 100 or so people gathered there to “vote no.”  This was repeated so many times I went away confused and with a headache.