I fear the Canon dost protest too much when he plaintively repeats that that they are not lawyers and that we have to trust the PM. Does not the Good Book counsel that trust should be placed in God, not man? The Churches should never have entered the negotiation with the PM unarmed. They should have taken their legal advisor. Unless of course they felt that in God they had the supreme advisor; in which case, He failed them miserably.

The government's pattern of behavior of publicly attacking and vilifying in the media reputable citizens of integrity who disagree with its actions dashes any hope that it is a government that can be trusted to wield unchecked powers responsibly and impartially. Do people really need any further evidence that their politicians are not yet ready to be vested with such expansive powers?

Understanding how the court declaration that UNIBAM seeks contradicts the Supremacy of God has proven as elusive as the Cheshire cat, perceptible perhaps only to those prone to celestial flights of fancy.

The Barrow rigmarole is this: take the offensive and deflect criticism by announcing radical (but ineffective, even stupid) legislative measures; watch the controversy unfold as the media (prone to react and not to probe) and interest groups take the bait; match words with “action” by tabling constitutional amendments which, in any event require a 90-day delay, by which time the urgency for action might have passed. Begin again at step one when the issue re-surges.

But let’s face it: he is not cutting it as party leader. Everyone is saying it behind his back; friends and foe alike. Every PUP polled by Flashpoint believes that rather than strengthening, the party is weakening. They don’t think he is growing into the role as leader, or that he can.

Minister Heredia delivered the treacherous blow. What was unexpected was that the PM would stand by and watch them go down, leaving them to exclaim as they fell: “Et tu, Barrow? Then fall Santiago and Stanley.”

Three years after the general election of February 2008, this is how the political balance sheet looks: the PUP resembles the UDP of old in Opposition – broke and fragmented; the UDP now resembles the PUP of old – confident, bold and well-financed. This picture is unlikely to change significantly over the next twelve months, in which case, the temptation to go for a fresh mandate might not be only irresistible, it might be good political judgment.

Mr. Obama’s White House had been roundly criticized for an attempt to exclude Fox News from particular media events, dismissing the station as a mouthpiece of the Republican Party. Obama’s point man, David Axelrod, had stated on ABC’s This Week that Fox was not a “real news agency” and that real news agencies “ought not to treat them that way.” The attempted lock-out collapsed after the other networks refused to participate if Fox was shut out.

Caught in a kind of looping Poe-ian horror, the electorate barely escapes plummeting into the pit of PUP corruption only to find itself prostrate to the descending, lacerating scythe of UDP incompetence. Each party subjectively sees its choice of torture as manifestly more acceptable than the other.

Like the nationalization of Telemedia, the PM may have a “bold, defining plan” for the Belize Judiciary. If so he should come out and say what it is. In the meantime, he should stop his messy, ad hoc tinkering with the rule of law lest it becomes a habit-forming addiction.