March 25, 2022

I will put a second question.
In terms of the catch limits that you refer to in
the second paragraph, have you got details of the
catch limits and how much those will be in relation to
each type of shark?

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Not at this time, but they will
certainly be made public and known to the relevant
commercial fishermen when they are set.

Oh, y our question. Yes, I did note that
you had questions. Go ahead. Put your question.

QUESTION 1: PROTECTION OF SHARKS AND THE
GIANT MANTA RAY

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Minister, can you pr ovide whether there will be an education campaign for
the communit y? We have a lot of recreational fishermen out here. And can you give details on the educ ational campaign?

Hon. Walter H. Roban: The answer is yes. And that
will be put together by the department. Obviously, our
first line of education will be with our commercial fis h-ermen, who are very much familiar with these issues.
And these matters have been discussed with the
Commercial Fisheries Council and the Marine R esource Board. But yes. As with all other matters per-taining to fishery, there will be an educational cam-paign put together.

Put your supplementary.

SUPPLEMENTARIES

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: In regard to recreational
fishermen, i.e., the weekend warriors , you know, when
you go fis hing it is what jumps on your line that you
bring in. And so how are we going to address these
issues if a recreational fisherman [accidentally] catc hes the shark? I mean, they are not intentionally breaking the law. They bring this shark to the surface, and either they bring it in or they release it. Now, if you are
in a rowboat and a shark gets on your line, guess
what you are going to try to do? Kill the bugger or
drown the bugger. And that does not help the intention
here. How are we going to address those circu mstances?

Minister.
Hon. Walter H. Roban: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
That is where education will come in as you
requested. My answer before—a robust education
programme will be put together to educate everyone
around these matters.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: I accept the education part.
But I am concerned that we will make recreational
fishermen criminals if they catch a shark unintentionally. And the same applies to people who are fishing off
of the rocks.

Put your questi on, Opposition Leader.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: The question is, How are
we going to ensure that these recreational fishermen, other than education, are not charged for catching
these sharks if they are fishing off of the rocks or fis hing in a boat by them selves and one other —not a
commercial one? I know it is education, but the fish will come to shore and they will be killed. And so how
are we going to deal with that? And how are we going
to ensure that those in recreation will not be charged?

Thank you.
Minister.
Hon. Walter H. Roban: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
1164 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly The Honourable Member seemed to put two
questions in there, but I will answer one; that is all I
can do. Education is key. There was no mention in my
Statement about penalties for poss ible . . . for som ebody who might unintentionally catch one of these
sharks, one of the prohibited shark varieties. But we
will look at what we can do around penalties if that is
what is required. But certainly education is the best
possible tool to the community around what the issues
are around the protection of species that can assist
those who may have an interest in fishing to know what they should look out for and how they should
deal with these situations if they arise.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Might I ask a suppl emental?

Yes.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: [The Honourable Minister]
said there will be a special licence. How much will that
licence fee be?

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Mr. Speaker, that question
was already asked.
Hon. N. H. Cole Simo ns: But it was not answered.
Hon. Walter H. Roban: I did give an answer.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Oh? How much?

So we approach this with cautious optimism. And I do have just a couple of questions referencing page 6, the top paragraph, where it
sort of begins to spell out how the mask -wearing will
become optional. So I would like to ask the Minister in
the first i nstance, will the optional feature be allowed
based on uploaded screening results into a system?

Minister.

Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain: The purpose of the different categories that we have come up with is one cat egory, you will have to demonstr ate. If you can demonstrate that 80 per cent of students and 80 per cent of
staff are uploading their results and offloading their
results, then you fall into the category with the least
number of restrictions. If you are below 80 per cent for
any of those categories, then you fall into the category
that has a bit more restrictions.

Thank you.
So just going to the actual testing and uploa ding into the site, for those parents who may not be
able to upload test results for whatever reason,
whether economic or technologically limited, are they
going to be penalised if they are not uploading test
results?

Hon. D iallo V. S. Rabain: We have not had any parents say that they were unable to or did not have the means to. If you are referring to the public school sy stem, it is accessible from any device that connects to
the Internet. So a telephone can do it. Or as we did
previously, there is an option for you to actually call the school and get that information to them. If you are
referring to the private school system, I do not know
what they have in place to take into account persons
who may not have technology to upload to them.
But I can say that it is not something that any
parent has actually asked for in the public school sy stem, not to my knowledge. So my assumption is the
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1165

Bermuda House of Assembly persons who are participating have the means to connect and upload the results.
But like everything else, there would be a pr ocessing place for anyone who found themselves unable to upload their results for whatever reason.

Yes, I believe so.
I just wanted to make sure. I know that the
testing has been going on for some time now. But I
just wanted to ask the Minister if he is receiving any
feedback on the costs of the [antigen] tests. Or please
remind me if the schools are giving these out for free in the public school system .

Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain: In the public school system
they are distributed to all parents and staff who sign up for the programme, at no cost to themselves.

I want to clarify maybe for the
listening audience as well, but this is basically incentive-based, right? So the more parents test their st udents, the more t hey get the results into the system,
the faster the school has a chance to get to an optional mask -wearing environment?

Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain: To answer that question,
as I mentioned in the Statement, if we move to an optional masking environment, the data are clear. Inc idences of secondary passing- on of COVID -19 go up.
We have to have things in place that catch positive
students before they enter into the building. And the
only way we can do that is with adequate screening
programmes.
So if you want t o call it “incentive,” that is what
you could call it. What I call it is our doing our due dil igence to be very, very careful to ensure that if we are going to relax the mitigations we have to stop the
spread of COVID -19 within our building, we have to
then do something on the other end to ensure that we
are doing everything possible to prevent positive st udents from coming into the building. So that is why the
most lenient categories are tied to high usage of the
screening programme. Because that is the on e met hod we have to ensure or to give us a high comfort level that we are going to catch persons before they
come into the building positive for COVID -19. The Speaker: Supplementary?

My third question is still on page
6 and [relates to ] the Education Emergency Measures
Committee [EEMC]. I just wanted to ask whether the
union is still actively participating and that they have
been a part of the development of these guidelines?

Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain: All three unions that we
have coll ective bargaining agreements with are invited
to the EEMC meetings. And they are free to attend
and submit their comments as necessary. We did r eceive comments from all of the unions except the BIU
[Bermuda Industrial Union] , in this particular instance,
who cover our custodians. But all of this document ation gets distributed to everyone to send in their comments. So yes, they are still involved.

So in the guidelines then, let us
put the optional mask -wearing aside. But within the
guidelines, can the Minister please confirm that we
are able to have students get back into some activities
such as sports days, field trips and some mixing of
bubbles? Those more social activities will now be r elaxed whether children are wearing a mask or not. But will those activities start to resume?

Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain: Prior to these r evised
guidelines that we have now, some of those things
[could] occur. But they were limited to mask -wearing
and such. So yes, as we move forward there are a lot more things that were somewhat limited that will now be much more open. So yes, as I mentioned in the
Statement, there will be sports days, parents can visit
the schools. Field trips, mixing of bubbles and the like
are all included in that. The use of certain layout,
movement between classrooms are all covered in the
new guidelines.
However, I wi ll consistently put forth that it is
optional, but I recommend that you wear your mask
1166 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly when you find yourself in close proximity such as our
children being in the classrooms for hours on end only
three feet away from each other.

Thank you. Thank you, Member.
Minister, you also have questions from anot her Member.
MP Dunkley, would you like t o put your questions at this point?

QUESTION 1: UPDATE ON SCHOOL COVID
PHASES —LIVING SAFELY WITH COVID IN
SCHOOLS

Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Yes. Good morning, Mr.
Speaker. Good morning, colleagues. My colleague
has done a good job with the questions.
But one question to the Honourable Minister,
and we certainly support the changes with cautious optimism. And yes, the key is personal responsibility.
Minister, will you table in the House the memo or the notification in detail on how you notified our school
system this morning of the changes that can take
place?

Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain: That is an interesting question because I had never actually done that before.
What happens, MP Dunkley, is a cover letter and a
copy of the regulations are always sent to all [public]
schools, all private schools, all system leaders within
the Department of Education. That letter was sent out.
It was supposed to have gone out by nine o’clock this
morning. I cannot confirm what time it actually did go
out. But they should hav e that in their hands as we
speak.
The purpose of that is [that] we have a policy
of informing our stakeholders of changes prior to go-ing to the general public. That is how we always do it
because we want them to be hearing from us first before they are hearing from, you know, a reporter or a
parent or someone who called and said, I heard
something; what’s going on?
I have never tabled that. It is public. It is a
public document. The regulations can be found on the
MOE [Ministry of Education] website. I have asked for
that to be updated no later than noon. So they will be on at noon because I wanted our school leaders, our
private schools and the like to have sight of this and
digest it and figure out how they are going to send it
out to their stakeholders or their constituents prior to
the general public and the press having it and then
asking questions. As I said, at noon everybody here is free to
hop on the MOE website and download a copy of it. I
will have a copy of it sent out to all MPs if that is advisable. I will send it to the House and have them
send it out. But the letter that was sent out, I guess I can have that forwarded as well. If that is what you
are asking for, I can have that cover letter forwarded
as well.

Supplementary.

Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Supplementary just for
clarification. Yes, that is what I am asking for and just
so we have a full understanding of what is proposed
and what will take place. That is all. Just for the information of the Honourable Members of the House.
I thank the Minister for his understanding.

Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain: Okay. Sure, sure.

Good morning ever yone, and the listening audience.
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1167

Bermuda House of Assembly I would like to send my congratulations to
Christ Church in Devonshire and their con gregation
for their very, very successful feeding programme.
This is their second anniversary.
This is their second anniversary. They started
in March of 2020 at the start of the pandemic. The Premier and I actually had the opportunity to go there,
I would say, maybe five or six months ago. It was
very, very impressive and a very committed group of
people. I would specifically like to congratulate the
organiser, Julie Kempe ; the Chef, Zahra Jabbar; the
many volunteers and also the many, many donors that
they have. This programme is currently four days a
week. It is from 12:30 to 1:30, Monday, Wednesday,
Friday and Saturday. And they serve 300 meals a day, which is in an hour and a half. To date they have
served 135,000 meals. They don’t advertise. The y
don’t seek publicity. They quietly and consistently
serve the people in need. So I extend our sincere
congratulations on their second anniversary and their
commitment to the people of Bermuda.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[Crosstalk]

Minister Ming, you have your three
minutes.

Hon. Renee Ming: Awesome. Thank you very much.
Mr. Speaker, and the listening audience, I
would like to extend condolences and prayers to the
family of Leon “Spider” Blak eney. An d I would also
like to associate MP Swan with that and MP Lovitta
Foggo as well. Mr. Blakeney was [97] years old and
last year he celebrated his [97
th] birthday and if you
had seen the video, Mr. Speaker, he was dancing with
the Gombeys who came down to at tend his [97th]
birthday. He was quite spritely. He was an avid cricket player and supporter. Somehow or the other he was
reflecting and he moved to Bailey’s Bay. He allowed
himself to be converted at the County level, but for as
many years he was in St. G eorge’s he did not allow
himself to be converted from Somerset, —

Smart man.
Hon. Renee Ming: —so if I had to have one flaw with
him it would have been because he was an avid St.
Georgian but he supported the wrong team at Cup
Match. But he has been married to Ms. Blakeney , Ms.
Catherine, for I believe it is over 50 years, actually,
maybe over 60 years. He will truly be missed around
St. George’s either at the bus stop or just trying to find
out where the Gombeys are going to be. So I would
just like for the—

[Inaudible interjections]

Mr. Speaker, I am going
to follow rig ht on that line and length, every pun i ntended for my dear friend, Leon “Spider” Blakeney,
and the condolences sent out to his family, especially
his lovely wife, Ms. Catherine Blakeney. And also she
suffered a double whammy because within hours her brother also passed, who was also my friend from St.
George’s, Leon Tacklin. The Blakeneys, the Jones, all
the families in St. George’s who are associated with these families are reeling at this particular time—

MP Swan, you microphone is indicatin g
that it is on, but we lost your audio.
MP?
I think he may have lost the connection because he doesn’t even note that we are acknowledg-ing him.
MP? MP Swan. MP Swan, I don’t think he has
even . . . he has lost our connection, Members. If he
gets back, we will give him a second opportunity. I am
going to have move on rather than have empty ai rtime.
1168 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a
young Bermudian who is beginning to start his career
post-graduation and maki ng waves in the world of
film. The young Bermudian I am speaking to, and if I
may declare my interest, Mr. Speaker, he is my son.
Nasir Alah Lionel Edwards Simmons, who, over the
past year, has won a number of awards in film. He began in 2021 with the Silv er Award for Outstanding
Achievement at the Virgin Spring Cinefest for his film
Tentacle Head. He won Winner of Best Performance
at the Experimental Dance and Music Film Fest in
2021. He was a semi -finalist at the Luleå International
Film Festival 2021, an d as an Official Selection for the
London Lift -Off Festival and a nominee for the Golden
Galaxy Award in 2022. I hope that my colleagues will
join me in congratulating my young son for his achievements in film outside of Bermuda. Thank you,

Thank you, Member. Congratulations
to the young man.
The Opposition Leader had been trying to get
in before. Opposition Leader, would you like to have
your three minutes now?

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you. I would like to
associate mysel f with the comments made by the pr evious speaker in regard to his son. As you will know, I
have been following the Honourable Minister’s chi ldren for a number of years and I am delighted that he
is doing well and I wish him all the very best.
I would als o like to send condolences out to
[the family of] Anesie Desing Johnson. He is a cousin
who has lived in the States. The Honourable Deputy
Speaker’s cousin, as well. As you know, we are relat-ed by blood. He passed unexpectedly in the US, so I
would like to send condolences to his family.
I would also like to send condolences to [the
family of] Mr. Anthony Gaade. He was from the royal
line in Dockyard [and] was 93 years old; a very kind
gentleman with a social conscience. He had all the
respect in the worl d for most people that he encountered. He was a true gentleman. He is survived by his
wife, Gillian, and his three daughters.
I would also send condolences to the family of
Alberto Bosch. He is the son of a well -known character who also has passed, Carlos Bosch, from the Bacardi f amily. He is survived by his brother, Carlos,
and his sister.
In addition, I would like to send condolences
to the family of Ms . Nell Johnson. She was a member
of St. Mark’s Church. She lived in Warwick and she
was a kind soul and always had a great, great smile
on her face and enjoyed life even though she may
have had some difficult times herself. She, in addition,
was a fabulous florist and could design a bouquet of
flowers like no one has seen before. She was always
involved i n the Rose Society.
So, again, I would like to send condolences to
those families on behalf of the House and my family.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, good morning [to
you] and to the listening audience.
Mr. Speaker, I would first like to associate with
the congratulations given by MP Jamahl Simmons on behalf of his son. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to
send congratulations to a number of my constituents.
A lot of them since last week have celebrated birt hdays. First, Ms. Ann Curtis of 11 Pearman’s Hill, it was
her birthday last week. Also, Ms. Tishae Davis of Su n
Valley, celebrated her birthday also last week. And
also, Mr. Steven Simons of 16 Spice Hill Road cel ebrated his 60th birthday on Sunday. And lastly, Ms.
Muriel Nus um of 69 Spice Hill Road celebrated her
88th birthday. So I would like to send congratulations
to all of those constituents.
And on a much sadder note, Mr. Speaker, I
would also like to send condolences to the family of
Ms. Maude Bassett, a constitu ent of mine who in a
months’ time would have been celebrating her 103rd
birthday. But I would like to say that I had the priv ilege, along with the Premier, of joining her for her
100th birthday three years ago and got to be able to
celebrate with a centenarian, Mr. Speaker. So on behalf [of the House] I would just like send condolences
to the family of Maude Bassett. And thank you for the time, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, let me start off on
a sad note and ask that condolences be sent to the
family of Ms. Beatrice Harris, a constituent of m ine of
Lusher Hill East. Ms. Harris was a very lovely lady
with an upbeat personality and will certainly be missed
by all her family and friends. So I send condolences to
her immediate family, especially her grandson,
Daelan, who I know will cer tainly miss her.
Also at this time I would like to be associated
with the condolences sent to [the family of] Mr. Spider Blakeney. He was a friend of our family as well, so I
just want to be associated with that.
But on a happier note, Mr. Speaker, I have to
date not given birthday greetings from the floor of the
House, mainly because it is my usual practice to connect with my family, friends and constituents on a
more personal basis when their birthdays come
around. Today, however, I wish to make an exception
and ask this House do send early birthday congratul ations because this person is a constituent of mine and
is very special not only to me, but to Bermudians in
general. This gentleman is my neighbour, my family
friend, and has been a strong defender of me as f ar
back as when I was in football administration. Mr.
Speaker, this gentleman has such a long sporting hi story that he is a legend in both football and cricket, but
I would probably need much more than three minutes
to do justice to his sporting feats. So I will just briefly
say, Happy 90
th birthday on Tuesday to the best and
most successful Cup Match captain. Happy birthday, Mr. Calvin “Bummy” Symonds. Your Loughlands fam ily is safe. We love you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We know that the cup will stay at Somerset, but don’t use your three minutes. Mr. Hubert (Kim) E. Swan: I am no t going to let you
cut into my three minutes, Mr. Speaker, because Leon
“Spider” Blakeley and Leon Tacklin’s family certainly,
my condolences, as I said, go out to them. They were
gentlemen many years my senior but they were my friends and I and many other s up and down this country and around the world are moved by their passing
but certainly appreciate their life that they have lived
on this earth. I just wanted in my short time to express
to the widow of Mr. Blakeley who has lost her brother
and her husba nd on the same day —deepest, deepest
condolences.
I would just like to be associated with Minister
Ming’s comments earlier going out to the Blakeney family out there in St. George’s and around Bermuda
and join in with Member Foggo in that, Mr. Speaker.
Thos e are my remarks on condolences, Mr. Speaker.

Any other . . . Deputy Speaker. How
are you this morning? You have your three minutes, sir.
Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, M r. Speaker, I
would like to also be associated with the remarks on
Spider Blakeney. Spider Blakeney was a great cric keter. He still holds history, even though it is contrary to
the constitution of the East End Counties. He played
County Cup for both Flatts and Bailey’s Bay. No one
has ever done it before, and I don’t think it will happen
again because you can only play for one County Cup.
Also, I would like to be associated with the
remarks concerning Sir Calvin “Bummy” Symonds. I
said “Sir Calvin.” I know when we mention that name
during cricket season people in Somerset tremble,
particularly around Cup Match time. But, Mr. Speaker, I would like to give congra tulations to Mr. Ken neth Eugene Smith, an entertainer
who graced our hotels in Bermuda for many years. He
celebrated his 100
th birthday on Sunday, March 20.
He is a very nice fellow. And I tell you, he has got a
great, great grandson who is walking right in his footsteps. He plays music by ear and he goes 12 this week. Boy, I can’t leave him out, but I will call Mr.
Kenneth Eugene Smith, 100
th born on Sunday and he
is still looking good.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like the Honourable House to send
condolences to Lori and Sam Talbot on the pas sing of
their husband and father, Phillip Talbot, who was the owner and proprietor of MR Onions on Par-laVille Road. For some years he ran a family place that
a lot of people went to and appreciated but unbeknownst to probably him or anybody else at that time
he also created such a welcoming environment that
he created a second family for a lot of people. As
people came and went through Bermuda, as young
Bermudians came home, as he trained Bermudians in the finer points of hospitality, he created a family that
sticks together even to this day. And although many have gone in separate ways across the globe, or separate ways in Bermuda, he will always be reme mbered, and I just want to make sure that our condolences are extended to his family who gave everythin g
to create a second wider family in Bermuda.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Premier, you have your three minutes.
Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would certainly like to be ass ociated with the remarks for Spider Blakeney, which
you have indicated to be associated with earlier.
I would also like to be associated with the
congratulatory message given by the Deputy Speaker
to Mr. Kenneth Smith who I was able to join in Sleepy
Hollow to wish him a happy 100
th birthday. And, Mr.
Speaker, at that event I did joke with the family of
whom I know reasonably well that it is a crime punis hable under the law to give false statements to officials of the Government of Bermuda. And it was clear that they were making false statements because there is
no way that Mr . Kenneth Smith looks like he has lived
on this earth for 100 years. He looks incredibly well,
Mr. Speaker. He was even entertaining people, pla ying on the piano at his birthday party. And it was great to see so many members of his family out supporting an incredible Bermudian. So, Mr. Speaker, I certainly
want to be as sociated on that.
As is tradition, I did go ahead and visit his
household, but certainly it would be great if the House
of Assembly could write a letter of congratulations for
a fine Bermudian celebrating a wonderful milestone.
Thank you, very much, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker: Thank you, Premier.
Does any other Member wish to be associated?
Are there any others who wish to make any
comments at this time?
There are none.
Before we leave this section I would just like
to be associated with the condolences that were expressed to the family of Maude Bassett in her 103
rd
year. MP Lister brought those condolences as Ms. Bassett was his constituent. But many years ago b efore she moved to that part of the Island, she was ac-tually a neighbour of ours as I grew u p in Somerset.
She lived right across the fence from us. So my con-dolences go out to her family and we recognise the
longevity of life that she brought and the impact that
she had on many people as a former school teacher
in our community.
With that said, we will move on.

MATTERS OF PRIVILEGE

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, on the 14th of February 2022,
after having served for almost three years and three
months as Bermuda’s Minister of Finance, I resigned.
Mr. Speaker, I did appreciate that my resignation
would be received with surprise by many, and I u nderstood that at some point in time I would be duty -
bound to provide an explanation to the people of Ber-muda on the reasoning for my decision. Today I will
do so within the structure set out below.
I fully support the principle of Cabinet conf identiality. Members of Cabinet must be able to have full and frank discussion with colleagues so as to pr ovide chal lenge and insight into the Government ’s policies of the day. In my remarks, I will remain within the confines of that confidentiality, and I take inspiration from the following guidelines which appear in the Mi nisterial Code of Conduct. In particular, sect ion A,
[General Principles which apply to Cabinet Ministers ,]
paragraph 1 which states :
“1. Ministers are expected to behave accor ding to the highest standards of constitutional and personal conduct in the performance of their duties. In
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1171

Bermuda House of Assembly particular, they m ust observe the following general
principles of Ministerial conduct:
i. Ministers must uphold the principle of Collective Responsibility.
ii. The policy of Ministers must be consistent
with the policy of Government as a whole.
Every Minister is expected to suppor t the
Government’s policy, and should resign if he
finds himself unable to do so.”
I also referenced section B, paragraph 4, [Collective Responsibility], which defines collective r esponsibility. It says:
“4.2 Collective Responsibility requires that
Ministe rs should be able to express their views frankly
in the expectation that they can debate freely in pr ivate while maintaining a united front when decisions
have been reached. This in turn requires that the pr ivacy and confidentiality of opinions expressed i n Cabinet and Cabinet Committees should be maintained.”
Mr. Speaker, over the last several weeks I
have sought to maintain a dignified silence on th e
subject of my resignation. I declined requests from the
press and others to publicly comment on the reasons
for my resignation, with a view of only doing so once
sufficient time has passed for a new Minister of F inance to manage through major time- sensitive issues
without contributing to additional distraction. My intention was that in due course, I would provide a stat ement speaking to the generalities of my reasons. Those reasons being:
1. That I would not compromise my principles in
the execution of my duties as Minister of F inance.
2. That in our system of governance—the Westminster system —a Minister who cannot
support the collective decisions of the Cabinet
is duty -bound to resign.
Mr. Speaker, my original plan did not provide
for me giving any further detail other than the reasons
provided above but [I] did anticipate that I would r elease the content of my resi gnation letter, which I will
now share with this Honourable House:
“Dear Premier,
“It has been an honour to serve as Bermuda’s Mi nister of Finance for the last 39 months.
“The opportunity to perform this important role in
Bermuda’s government during a time of economic
uncertainty, compounded by the challenges of a
global pandemic, has been one of the high points
of my professional career. Notwithstanding the challenges, meaningful progress has been made
on key initiatives.
“My obligations as Minister of Finance require me
to act as a fiduciary and to put the interests of the people of Bermuda first. For the majority of my
tenure, we have worked together to deliver great value. Over the course of the last year, however,
there has been a growing gap in our res pective
approaches on a number of key issues. “Our country deserves a Minister of Finance who
can work seamlessly with the Premier to advance its economic and fiscal interests; a Minister of F inance who can fully support the policy agenda that has been set . Regretfully, I no longer find myself
able to fulfil that role. I hereby resign from my pos ition as Minister of Finance.
“Thank you for the opportunity to serve. I now look
forward to spending more time with my family and
continuing to serve the people of Bermuda through
Constituency 21.
“Yours sincerely,
“Curtis L . Dickinson”
The letter was intentionally general in its n ature; my preference being to share the specific rea-sons for my decision directly with the Premier in our
face- to-face meeting. Mr . Speak er, I do not intend to
disclose the full content of those discussions as it
would be in appropriate to do so. However, I do b elieve that it is appropriate to respond to several stat ements that have been made, with clarifying facts.
Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that the demands
of work in the public sector can be incredibly taxing not only on the individual serving in the role, but also
on their families. I would like to thank the Premier for
acknowledging my family in his S tatement announcing
my resignation. I would also like to take this opportunity to address any suggestions in the community that
matters with my family were among the reasons for
my resignation. This suggestion is untrue.
The decisions to run as a candidate in the
2018 by e-elections and the subsequent 2020 General
Election were not mine alone, as I sought and r eceived the full support of my wife and our three chi ldren before any announcement of my candidacy. I undertook similar discussions on being invited to join
the Cabinet and again received my family’s full support. The decision to resign on a matter of principle,
however, was my decision; a decision that enjoys the undiluted support of my family.
Mr. Speaker, the quantum of and form of the
Government’s support of the redevelopment of t he
Fairmont Southampton were the primary reasons b ehind my resignation.
Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, I want to
make it abundantly clear that I was, and still am, supportive of a level of financial support for this project.
There truly are numerous pot ential benefits of renovating and reopening a large, iconic hotel of this n ature, especially at this time where economic recovery
is vital. These include immediate and significant stimulus, construction and related economic activity, a
large number of future hotel jobs, and a large increase
in hotel room inventory, which could help support
more visitor demand and airlift capacity over time.
However, Mr . Speaker, I was and continue to
be unable to ignore the principles and judgment gained through my over 30 years of experience in i nvestment and commercial banking. Mr . Speaker, I be1172 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly lieve I am more than qualified to understand the numbers and negotiate in the best interests of Bermuda
considering all of the factors, particularly in circumstances where the Gover nment was ably assisted by
professional advisers.
There has been significant confusion recently
created in the public around whether the Government
had entered into a guarantee commitment with the
developers. It has been suggested that in 2019 the
Governm ent entered into a $50 million guarantee with
Westend Properties Limited/Gencom for the redevelopment of the Fairmont Southampton hotel. That is
incorrect.
In December 2019, as part of the acquisition
of the Fairmont Southampton, the Government entered int o a Letter of Intent [LOI] with the developers
which set out a number of conditions precedent that the developers would need to satisfy before the grant
of any Government of Bermuda guarantee. An LOI is
not a commitment. It is a non- binding agreement that
sets out a series of terms from which the parties i ntend to negotiate into a more substantive and binding
agreement. The LOI that I signed in December 2019
contained a number of terms that the developers
would need to meet or agree with in advance of the
provision of support from the Bermuda Government in
the form of a guarantee on a portion of their contemplated financing.
As part of the negotiation of any final agreement, we would also require sufficient rights in the
event of default. In any event, the developers did not
meet the LOI conditions precedent, and the Letter of
Intent expired on 31 December 2020. Since I resigned
from the position of Minister of Finance, I have not
been involved in the negotiation of the transaction with
the developers and so, with the rest of this Honour able House, I will learn about what has been proposed
or agreed as it is released to the public. There are a
few thoughts about agreements of this nature, howe ver, that I think it helpful to share as the Government considers th is course of action.
It has been reported in the press that the
Government may extend the period of concessions for
hotel developments/redevelopments from beyond the
maximum current term of 10 years. As a general matter, I do not support such extensions, as concessions
are essentially the forfeiture of future government revenue. I believe the existing legislation which grants up
to 10 years of relief is more than sufficient. Compar isons are commonly made to other jurisdictions in an effort to justify an ex pansion of the duration of concessions. However, these comparisons are usually
incomplete and fail to capture the entirety of the d ynamics of the Bermuda economic model or the speci fic financial returns profiles of the hotel ow ner/developer.
As contemplate d in the 2019 Letter of Intent,
the developers would have benefited from a reduced rate of interest on the debt that the Government was contemplating providing a guarantee on. The combination of interest cost savings and tax concessions
could deliver the developers significant savings in the
millions of dollars. These projected savings should be
quantified for the benefit of the public. Any increase in the concessions period would result in even greater
savings and benefits to the developers. Additionally,
the precedent would be set for similar grants of concessions for other hotel developments. This adds si gnificantly to the true cost of the extension and should be fully understood.
Given the Government’s current fiscal pos ition, is it prudent to give futur e tax revenues to developers who by virtue of their own financial return pr ojections would already be projected to earn multiples
of their invested capital? Even if changes to existing
tourism incentives are warranted, perhaps the anal ysis should be completed first for the industry at large
rather than predicated on a single request. Otherwise,
the overall cost could be astounding, and without the
analysis I am unsure if it will be worth the rush.
It should also be fully understood that the
Government carri es the risk of the downside if the
guarantees are called. It is an appropriate question to
ask what direct upside the Government is due to r eceive. Certainly, the other capital providers —senior
lenders, mezzanine lenders and equity providers ( who
in this c ase are the developers) —will have a clear e xpectation on their risk/return expectations. As the ent ity that bears ultimate responsibility on a significant amount of the capital at risk, the Government should
have the same.
Each of the other capital providers will be able
to point to some collateral which provides an added layer of security for their risk. It is no different where
home- buyers buy a home. A bank will extend a mor tgage but will secure its loan against the building in the event the mortgage pay er defaults on their payments.
Where the Government assumes an exposure of this
size, it should be clear what that collateral is and what
rights, in the event of default, the people of Bermuda
have to exercise.
There are a number of key similarities between the Morgan’s Point development and the
planned redevelopment of the Fairmont Southampton.
Both projects share the backing of an enthusiastic
developer with a grand vision of the finished develo pment. Both projects, while long on vision, were/are
short on the capital required to fund their construction.
In other words, both projects lack or lacked a fully funded capital structure which has necessitated the introduction of Bermuda Government -guaranteed capital. If the Government support is not structured c orrectly and the developers are unsuccessful, we could see the Government having to assume the respons ibility for the repayment of any guaranteed debt.

[Crosstalk]

Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1173

Bermuda House of Assembly The Speaker: Member, your phone is on.
MP Lister, please turn your microphone off.

Of course, it has always
been an option to reduce the size and scope of the
development or for the developer to put additional
capital into the project. Both are acceptable ways to
address funding gaps and some indication of both or
either would lend further support to the transaction.
Funds paid in, however, should not be paid back out as fees to related parties, as that does not maintain the appropriate level of financial exposure for the developers. In deal parlance, that is called having “skin
in the game. ”
Consequently, I would suggest that a full
breakdown, including total proposed foreign and domestic debt, be provided to this Honourable House.
Mr. Speaker, the best partnerships are built
on a foundation of mutual trust and respect, and a
commitment to collaboration in the pursuit of a mutually satisfactory outcome. Relationships are bilateral arrangements with give- and-take coming from both
sides. The decision to delay fulfilment of the obligation to Fairmont employees made redun dant because of
the hotel’s closure will remain a point of concern for
me on the developers’ willingness to honour their obl igations. It is a matter of public record that the emplo yees were only paid after the Bermuda Government stepped in to provide direc t financial support to the
employees and then supported the pursuit of a stat utory demand to recoup those funds. This should be a cause of concern and result s in an increased focus on
ensuring that the necessary protections are put in
place to protect the Government’s and the people of
Bermuda’s interest.
As I have mentioned previously, the redevelopment of the Fairmont Southampton, in my view, is a
national strategic initiative; one that requires that the
Government be pragmatic in its approach to any support. However, the national strategic importance does
not give justification to the abandonment of best pri nciples. To be clear, I want to see the successful redevelopment and reopening of the Fairmont Southam pton hotel. A redeveloped hotel will see invest ment in
Bermuda’s economy, the creation of construction jobs, the re- employment of many hospitality workers, and
the return of paying guests; all told a positive impact
on Bermuda’s economy.
While as a general matter I do not support the
provision of Gover nment guarantees to private sector
participants, in the case of this project, I can support
the issuance of a Government guarantee, so long as it is necessary and the interests of the people of Bermuda are appropriately protected. The risks are so
high and the record with guarantees to external pr ojects so real that only a full and transparent examination of the protections by this Honourable House are
warranted. Mr. Speaker, I am hopeful that the points that
I have just articulated are helpful to not only those
now responsible for leading the negotiations on this
project, but also to those who share the concerns
about the Government’s fiscal situation. It is my de-sire, as I am sure it is for all of the people of Bermuda,
to see a project that is successful, not only for the d evelopers, but also for the hotel’s guests, employees,
the Bermuda Government and, most importantly, the
people of Bermuda.
Mr. Speaker, it has truly been an honour to
serve as Minister of Finance for the last three- plus
years. The opportunity to be of service to my country
and be able to use the skills and experiences gained
over my career in the private sector has been fulfilling.
I would like to thank my family for their unstinting love
and support. I would also like to express my profound thanks to the team in the Ministry of Finance; they
have been first -class in the advice and counsel that
they have provided me. This team continue to serve the country well.
I would like to thank my former Cabinet co lleagues and wish them well in their stewardship of our country.
Many thanks to those who have reached out
to offer support to me directly, or indirectly through
family and friends. This has included, among others,
members of the Progressive Labour Party, members of the broader Public Serv ice, members of Bermuda’s
unions, and the domestic and international business
communities. I appreciate your well wishes and your
outreach has been a source of comfort during a very
difficult decision.
And finally, Mr . Speaker, I would like to thank
the constituents of constituency 21 [Pembroke South
East] and constituency 25 [Warwick North East ] for
their ongoing support and trust in me to serve as their
representative in this Honourable House. Mr. Spea ker, in my almost four years of service in this Honour able House, I have yet to participate in the motion to adjourn. It is a reasonable assumption that I will not
participate in that portion of the Order Paper this
evening. I would, however, as I conclude this stat ement, like to make some observations on where we are as a country and how we move forward.
Mr. Speaker, Bermuda is facing a number of
serious challenges. We as a community need to be
working together to finds ways to overcome these
challenges. Over the course of the last four weeks, we
have been en gaged in a series of budget debates.
Having now sat through four annual budget sessions,
they have taken on a sameness; a Budget Statement
is delivered, followed by a Budget Reply and then a
series of debates that seemingly focus on what the
other side has done wrong. If only these efforts were
focused on solving Bermuda’s problems rather than blaming the other side or the former administrations, we could possibly make real progress with our challenges.
1174 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly Some would say the system is broken or it’s
just poli tics. I would ask , however, how is it helping
the cause of the people of Bermuda? I am not so
quick to accept that the system is broken, but instead
ask, can we not do our jobs as leaders better? Many people are counting on us to do so in their best interest. There is no monopoly on good ideas on either
side of the aisle.
It would be wonderful to see us working t ogether for the benefit of the people that we all serve.
Thank you.

There is one Government Bill to be i ntroduced today by the Deputy Premier.
Deputy, would you like to introduce your Bill at
this time?
You are muted, Deputy.

FIRST READING

MARRIAGE AMENDMENT ACT 2022

Hon. Walter H. Roban: I wish, Mr. Speaker, to intr oduce the following Bill for its first reading so that it
might be placed on the Order Paper for the next day
of meeting, the Marriage Amendment Act 2022.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Are there any objections to that, Members?
No objections.
Continue, Premier.

DRAFT ORDER

GAMING (DESIGNATED SITE) ORDER 2022

Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Order before this Honour able House is very short and comprises only two claus-es; however, Mr. Speaker, this measure is another
building block to be laid in the all -hands restoration
effort in support of tourism in Bermuda.
Mr. Speaker, Honourable Members will be
aware that this Order is made by the Minister respo nsible for gaming, under the provisions of section 4 of the Gaming Act 2014. That section permits the Mini ster responsible for gaming, acting on the advice of the
Gaming Commission to make and publish an order designating a site on which a casino may be located.
Mr. Speaker, the location of the site under this
Order is set out in the Schedule and is better and well known to the public as the Fairmont Southampton. So,
of course, some still refer to it as the Fairmont Sout hampton Princess, Mr. Speaker. Earlier today, Mr.
Speaker, I signalled that the Government had reached
agreement with the new owners of the Fairmont
Southampton f or the development of that critical property.
Mr. Speaker, the casino is a critical part of the
redevelopment of that hotel. From a tourism perspective, marketability is enhanced by the addition of a
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1175

Bermuda House of Assembly gaming component and a full -service resort hotel must
have all the elements required to justify its price
points. The casino, Mr. Speaker, is as important as
the beach club, the pool and the restaurants. Its avai lability to guests is another means by which to enhance their experience. Casinos enhance the attraction of group business for Bermuda’s largest conference hotel, which is certainly important as it returns to
group business, and casinos also support increased
bed nights in our shoulder and off -season in conjunction with those large groups.
Mr. Speaker , I can advise this Honourable
House that an order in respect of the site had been
prepared in 2017 under the previous administration,
but it was not advanced in the Legislature. The Gam-ing Commission has confirmed that all necessary
conditions under the a pplication process have been
met and therefore their advice is that this order can properly be made.
Mr. Speaker, I am therefore pleased to commend this Order for the support of this Honourable
House and welcome the support of Honourable Members as we work together to support the return of the
Fairmont Southampton and the 800 jobs that will be
created in Bermuda when this hotel reopens.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Opposition Leader, you have the floor.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Speaker, I will start by
stating that we in the Opposition have no objection to
this Order. We expected it and if it enh ances our
product offering then that is the least that we can do.
But I do have a question, Mr. Speaker. My
question is, When is this Government going to deliver
on gaming? We have been on this roadmap for 10 to
15 years, Mr. Speaker, and to date we do not have
gaming. We have the St. Regis which has a prov isional licence. We have Hamilton Princess that has a provisional licence. And like Southampton Princess, they want to enhance their attraction. They want to
increase their bed nights. And they want to im prove
their product offering. And yet we still cannot bring
gaming to a completion in this country.
Can the Minister of Finance let this country
know when gaming will be delivered? If he is so co mmitted to tourism and getting our tourism product up to
scratch so that we can have more bed nights, more
people coming to Bermuda and to improve our product offering, he should have a target date for the de-livery of gaming. And to date, we have not seen it.
We do not know what it is, and our hotels
which have pr ovisional licences are just as frustrated in that they have invested capital and they cannot deliver the level of service that they expect for their five -
star jurisdictions. Enough is enough. Ten years is way
too long to deliver a gaming industry in a juri sdiction of
our size. Let’s get it done.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like
to first declare my interest. I have spent my entire life
in the hospitality industry. My family, I am here at a
family function right now, unfortunately a funeral. I
have been here looking at m y 90-year-old uncle who
told me that when his grandmother’s property right
there on that same Fairmont Southampton Princess property was compulsorily acquired to make way for
what became an iconic hotel, the Southampton Pri ncess hotel. So I understand that .
I do not want tomorrow’s headline to be,
Where is gaming? Because we all know that the O pposition can come out with a predetermined headline
and the Royal Gazette picks it up. I just want to say
that it is important, Mr. Speaker, for the [number] of
jobs that will be created that we are in a position
where we can start looking forward to the future with a
date certain in 2023 when the Fairmont will be open,
when the Southampton Princess will be reopen. And I
think that is an important point that need not to be
missed on anyone, notwithstanding the jobs that will
be created in the immediate term, notwithstanding the
climate that we climbed through over the last two
years, to no one’s fault but a pandemic that has grap-ple this entire world.
The reality is th at we need jobs and we need
them now. And, yes, if the Opposition could have waived a magic wand during their tenure when they
ushered in the St. Regis . . . and I am not faulting
them for that, we have St. Regis there. I am sure they
would have put that i n place so that when they
opened, when they gave them the deal that the gaming licence would have been afforded at that particular
time, Mr. Speaker.
But we all know, and the Opposition Leader
would know better than me because that is his profes-sion in banking, that even a country boy like me could
have his mother’s account shut down for compliance.
There is a different climate in this world today when
you have to deal with banking matters internationally.
And when you have to deal with them in a j urisdict ion that relies on its reputation, it has to certainly
measure twice and cut once. It certainly has to dot its
i’s and cross its t’s, especially in this climate of finan1176 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly cial compliance. We have seen in my lifetime in this
Legislature, Mr. Speaker, we have seen the BMA
grow from a small organisation to a very big worldly
one. Why? Because the world of compliance is the
way we have to go.
So, you know, you can’t just come here and
look for headline grabbers. We have to look for sol utions and a way forward. And the way forward is that we all in this country, Opposition and Government
need to be rowing in the same direction to get us all
on a good foot, in a good space, in a good place to go take this country forward economically, Mr. Speaker.
And let us not wak e up tomorrow morning and not see
anything less than we are moving in the right direction, being able to have some hotel beds of a signif icant enough quantity so that airlines can start pla nning their future and groups can start planning to come to this co untry in the way they used to do with
IBM and Time magazine, coming to the country, pla ying the golf courses, going to the restaurants, which afforded the international company businesses to grow and to come to this country because they had an
infrastructure that served them well.
And we are going to get the Orange Route
coming to St. George’s with the ferry from Dockyard
and maybe we will get the Belmont Ferry going more
and . . . daylong because we will have more people in
the country, Mr. Speaker. That is what we need to
start focusing on.
And I am here to say, Mr. Speaker, as one
who hangs his hat on the tourism industry, Well Done!
to be in this place. And yes, we have got some work
to do. Let us do it together. Help us in any way you can. Criticise u s when you must, but not because you
have to.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I just wanted to say that I am glad to hear the
news that we are moving forward with this particular
piece of legislation to ensure that Southampton Pri ncess has the opportuni ty like the rest of the hotels that
are already existing and those possibly in the future
have opportunities where they can increase their revenue and also increase the lot in the pot of the Go vernment.
I take to heart [what] the former speaker, the
Honour able Kim Swan, from constituency 2 [said], as
he mentioned about us working together. But let me say this here, it becomes extremely difficult when we
get conflicting information being put out by the same
Members of the party. One minute a guarantee is in
place and another minute a guarantee is not in place.
It is clear as mud. Then we hear commitments that, okay, we are going to have this licence in place by
next year. And then the next year comes and you are
asked the same question, Well, what is going to happen? And we have no direction on exactly what is going to happen.
We are spending all this time, quite frankly, on
Southampton Princess and we are spending all of this
time on what might be— what “might be” in the f uture— when the existing (“what is”) hotels that have
been trying to get a licence and get going is not being given the amount of time and attention that it should
be given to and this Government should be flexible enough and if it has the intellectual capital as it says,
regardless of COVID -19, we should be moving ahead
with this legislation.
All throughout COVID -19 we were getting le gislation done. So the question begs, why is it that we
are spending all this time moving forward on som ething that might be when we have existing people who
are paying their taxes, who are adding to the coffers
of government right now, why aren’t they being given
the attention so that they can have their licence now?
There is nothing wrong with that.
This is good, critical criticism. These are questions that shoul d be answered. But when we get the
answers back . . . for instance, a classic example,
again, clear as mud. This morning we heard a stat ement that says that this Southampton Princess is going to provide 600 jobs. We now hear the Premier
within an half an h our, 40 or 45 minutes, or so, we
now hear it is going to be 800 jobs. So which one is it?

Hon. E. David Burt: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Yes.

POINT OF ORDER
Hon. E. David Burt: The statement that was submi tted to the House of Assembly has 600 jobs for construction and it listed 600 jobs as the number also for the operation of the hotel. That was sent to the
Speaker. I delivered the correct versi on. But when I
spoke that it was 800 jobs for operation, the two number interspersed. So that is just a clarification. It was
not something that was intended to mislead. I sent it
to the Speaker. I did apologise when I read it to the House. I read the corr ect number for the second one
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1177

Bermuda House of Assembly and the updated Statement was sent to the Speaker
to make sure it was replaced.
I do apologise for the confusion, MP Ca nnonier.

Well, I think it just continues
to add to the complexity and the challenges that people are having.
I accept the apology and I recognise that
these things can happen. But this is not the first time
that this has happened. I mean, we have just gone
through the Budget Debate and we saw the complete debacle. And one of the particular Ministries where
. . . you know, completely, lost about 15 minutes because of reading the wrong things and the wrong numbers. I don’t know what is going on, but I am in
support ensuring that this gaming gets done.
But what I am appealing to the Premier is,
Premier, we need these hotels, who have these prov isional type licences trying to get things done. We
need that attention to be given. There has not been a
statement yet on the progress of what is going to happen to St. Regis, Hamilton Princess, and the likes,
who are sitting there waiting to get going.
We have missed the first boat when it came to
gaming. We missed the second boat. We are missing the third boat. And according to the Tourism Authority,
we have missed the boat —period, just about —when it
comes to this whole issue of gaming. So we have got
to get moving here. And all I am asking the Premier to do, as the Minister of Tourism, is to get going on these
licences for the existing hotels. They are sitti ng in
waiting. We are talking to them; just like he is talking
to them. And we are sitting here saying, Well, what is
going on? Everyone is saying, What is going on?
So it would be nice for the next Statement that
he gives on Tourism to give us an update on exactly
where we are with gaming for these other hotels. Not
on something that might be. And I know that this has
to be done because it is probably the terms of the agreement to have this in place for this new up and
coming hotel that is going to provid e jobs.
I guess my real question at the end of the day
is, What are real numbers that we are going to generate for jobs? What is the actual commitment to the
number of jobs that is going to be put out there? We
are hearing about construction. That’s all good. We
know about that. It is going to provide jobs just like we
as an administration created jobs in other hotel pr ojects. So what exactly is going to be those numbers?
And what is going to be the scope of what is
going to be built up there and what can we expect that
is going to be new, that is going to create some hope around this whole idea of gaming? Because right now
even with the Statement that has just been given,
there is no hope in this project coming up. So we need to see something happening. And again, we are hearing conflicting information on how to finance it and the
likes. It would be good that we get some statements
from the Premier, as the Minister of Tourism, on these
other projects.
Let’s get these things going. These people are
already paying into the coffers of Government. Give
them the dignity of getting things done for them and we can move on with Southampton Princess.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member.
Does any other Member wish to make a contribution at thi s time?
Any other Member?
There are none, Premier.
Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I will just say this. The Honour able Shadow Minister of Finance and Leader of the
Opposition knows full well that the Minister respons ible for gaming cannot grant a gaming licence. And so
when the Honourable Opposition Leader is asking for
timelines, and wants me to put on the Statements i nside of this House on something that I do not have
responsibility for, recognising the negative impact that
can have in the global regulatory landscape . . . the
licensing of hotel casino operations is not a matter for
the Government of Bermuda. It is a matter for the
Bermuda Casino Gaming [Commission].
There were amendments that were made last
year in this House which were the amendments which
were necessary and required to make sure that banking of casino gaming proceeds can happen. Individual
developers have said that this process is complete. I
have seen the emails from the persons who have pr ovisional licences that say that all of the matters r egarding moving forward with banking are fine. But l icensing is an issue for the Bermuda Casino Gaming
Commission.
We will do everything that we can to go ahead
and support that process. But what must be u nderstood is that we have strict regulatory processes in
place. That is what is necessary to make sure that we can protect our international ratings [so Bermuda can]
continue to be a place for international business. And
the Shadow Minister of Finance and Leader of the
Opposition knows that full well.
Would I have loved to have seen a casino
open already, Mr. Speaker? Absolutely. But we have made the legislative changes which are necessary,
which were requested and which were asked for in
order to make sure that matters are facilitated. [We]
remember doing that when we were in this House in
the winter session last year, Mr. Speaker.
To respond to MP Cannonier’s questions, the
number of jobs for the construction phase of the pr oject is 650, and the number of jobs, full -time jobs that
1178 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly are expected for full -time opening of the hotel is 800.
Those are the job figures, Mr. Speaker.
I am grateful that the Opposition supports this
matter moving forward and we look for to it progres sing through this House and als o the other place, Mr.
Speaker.
So with that, I move that the said draft Order
be approved and that a suitable message be sent to
Her Excellency the Governor.

Thank you, Members, for your contrib ution in that matter. We now move on to the second Order for t oday wh ich is consideration of the Electricity (Regulat ory Authority Fees) Amendment Regulations 2022 in
the name of the Minister of Home Affairs, the Deputy
Premier.
Deputy Premier.

DRAFT REGULATIONS

ELECTRICITY (REGULATORY AUTHORITY FEES)
AMENDMENT REGULATIO NS 2022
Hon. Walter H. Roban: Yes. Again, good morning,
Mr. Speaker, and good morning to the listening public
and Members of the House.
With the Governor’s recommendation and in
accordance with section 36(3) of the Bermuda Const itution I move that consid eration be given to the draft
Regulation entitled
Electricity (Regulatory Authority
Fees) Amendment Regulations 2022 , proposed to be
made by the Minister resp onsible for Energy for the
purpose of establishing Regulatory Authority fees for
the electricity sector pursuant to the Electricity Act
2016 in exercise of the power conferred by section 44
of the Regulatory [Authority] Act 2011.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present the
Electricity (Regulatory Authority Fees) Amendment
Regulations 2022 for consideration in this Honourable
House in accordance with section 44 of the Regulat ory [Authority] Act 2011.
Mr. Speaker, these fees are part of the funds
which finance the activities of the Regulatory Authority of Bermuda. These fees apply to each licensee who
provide services to customers according to the terms
and conditions required by the supply or transmission
distribution and retail licences. The fees noted in t his
amendment pertain to the application of a transfer of
licence which is reduced from $25,000 to $2,400. The reduced fee in line with the analogous fee of the electronic communication sector.
Mr. Speaker, the fee comprises a portion of
the funds collec ted by and for the use of the Regulat ory Authority. These fees provide the necessary funds to the Regulatory Authority to fulfil its statutory oblig ations under the Regulatory Authority Act 2011 and the
Electricity Act 2016, and include conducting market
studies, imposing remedies, enforcing regulations and
protecting consumers.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, all other fees pr oposed to remain the same as last years. The slight
reduction is in adherence to section 44 of the Regul atory Authority Act 2011 which requires the fees to be
reviewed annually. If these new regulations are not
made, the fees would increase by the Consumer Price Index under section 44(14) of the Act. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.

Thank you, very much, Mi nister.
Understanding that under licence in the 2016
Act, a licence is being des cribed “as a valid licence
granted by the Authority.” I am still trying to understand the explanation of licence transfer or assignment. With that assignment, what exactly . . . what
other ground are we covering here when we say “or
assignment”?
And I was not quite clear from the explanation
just now if that was qualified clearly enough for the public to understand and for ourselves.
Additionally, as the Minister did mention in the
Electricity (Regulatory Authority Fees) Regulations
2021, we see the licence transfer fee of $25,000. It
still was not clear also on how we have reduced it to
$2,400, and an explanation as to how that is happen-ing. That is a huge difference and I was hoping that
the Minister would be able to elaborate a bit more on
how we got to $2,400 in this case.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, MP Cannonier.
Does any other Member wish to make a contribution at this time?
None.
Minister.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Yes, thank you for the question.
There were two questions pres ented by the
Honourable Member about assignments as well as
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1179

Bermuda House of Assembly transfer. Those sort of processes happen with applic ation to the particular . . . to the Authority such as we
recently (not too long ago) had a change in control of
the utility, a couple of years ago, from Ascendant to
Algonquin. So that would have been a part of the pr ocess. But that process has to be done through appl ication to the Regulatory Authority and this would have
been the fee that would have been attached to that
application.
Fee levels are set according to assessment of
the earnings and revenue of each licence provider. So this adjustment would have been made in relation to
that. There was clearly, due to the pandemic, reductions in revenues to the licence for transmission distr ibution and retailer and the Regulatory Authority would
have assessed its fees on the basis of the change in
that. And this is done across licence sectors.
I think I have answered both questions, Mr.
Speaker.

Thank you, Members, for your partic ipation in that matter.
We will now move on to the third item on the
Order Paper today which is consideration of the Electronic Communications (Regulatory Authority Fees)
Regulations 2022, again in the name of the Minister of
Home Affairs, Deputy Premier.
Minister.

DRAFT REGULATIONS

ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS (REGULATORY
AUTHORITY FEES) REGULATIONS 2022

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.
With the Governor’s recommendation and in
accordance with section 36(3) of the Bermuda Const itution I m ove that consideration be given to the draft
Regulation entitled Electronic Communications (Regulatory [Authority] Fees) Regulations 2022, proposed to
be made by the Minister responsible for Telecomm u-nications in exercise of the power conferred by sec-tions 6 and 11 of the —
[Inaudible interjections]

Continue on.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: —exercise of the power conferred by sections 6 and 11 of the Electronic Comm unications Act 2011 as read by section 44 of the Regulatory [Authority] Act 2011.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present the
Electronic Communications (Regulatory Authority
Fees) Regulations 2022 for consideration in this Honourable House in sections 6 and 11 of the Electronic Communications Act 2011 and in accordance with
section 44 of the Regulatory Authority Act 2011.
Mr. Speaker, these fees are what in part fund
the activities of the Regulatory Authority of Bermuda.
These fees apply to each carrier to provide services to
customers according to the terms and conditi ons r equired in their individual communications operating licences. The fees are calculated on the basis of rel evant turnover of which a percentage is assessed. The percentage proposed for the coming year is 1.65 per
cent, a decrease of 0.05 per cent over last year’s fees. This slight reduction is in response to the actual needs of the Regulatory Authority in regulating the electronic
communications sector and to pass the savings back
to the sector, recognising these are more challenging
times.
Mr. Speaker , the fee comprises a portion of
the funds collected by and for the use of the Regulat ory Authority. These fees provide the necessary funds
to all the Regulatory Authority to fulfil its statutory obl igations under the Regulatory Authority Act 2011 and
Electronic Communications Act 2011 among which
are to conduct market studies to impose remedies, to
enforce regulations, and to protect consumers.
Mr. Speaker, the other difference proposed in
this year’s regulations is the reduction to zero dollars
for the application to use non- identity frequency spectrum from last year’s $500. This slight reduction is proposed to increase the interest in underutilised
spec trum and anticipates a greater vibrancy in services provided to the Bermuda market.
In closing, all other fees are proposed to r emain the same as last year’s. These slight reductions are in response to section 44 of the Regulatory A uthority Act 2011 which requires fees to be reviewed
annually. If these new regulations are not made, the
1180 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly fees would increase by the Consumer Price Index u nder section 44(14) of the Act.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And
thank you, Honourable Minister and Deputy Premier.
What we have before the House this morning,
as the Minister has just explained, are the Electronic
Communications (Regulatory Authority Fees) Regul ations 2022. And as with these fee changes, it is a lways helpful to compare them against the previous
year which was the same regulations of 2021.
My question for the Honourable Minister in r eply would be this: It appears from the bri ef that he has
just presented to the House and from reading the
Regulations, that there are merely two changes being
implemented, as I understand it. The first is in Schedule 1, and as the Honourable Minister indicated in his
brief, there is a reduction in the licensee’s fee. The fee
is linked to the licensee’s relevant turnover, and it is
an annual turnover it would appear from the text in
Schedule 1. And the reduction is from 1.70 per cent to
1.65 per cent. So it is a slighter marginal reduction.
The Honourable Minister explained the reduction with reference to the “needs of the Regulatory Authority” (quote/end quote). So I invite the Honour able Minister perhaps to give a little bit more meat to
the bone there. It is not entirely clear why it is relevant
to the needs of the Regulatory Authority to reduce the
licensee’s fee against the licensee’s relevant turnover.
So perhaps if he could just explain a little bit
more. Was this at the request of the licensee? Why is
it in the needs of the Authority to be reducing this fee?
I am not suggesting it is not. It would just be a little bit
helpful to the Honourable House to know a little bit more about why this fee reduction is actually occurring
because the “needs of the Regulatory Authority” is a
little bit vague .
The second change that appears to be happening by reason of these regulations, again, when
contrasted with the 2021 Regulations is in Schedule 2.
We heard a little bit more about that and that was the
application fee for non- identity spectrum applicatio ns.
And that fee was previously $500. It is being reduced
to zero dollars, to nil dollars. We understand from the
Minister’s brief to the House that this was because he
was trying to encourage applications. So I am just c urious, Were there any applications for non- identity
spectrum permits (if they are permits) or licences (if they are licences)? Were there any applications? Is it the absence of any applications that is triggering the
reduction in fee?
So with those two or three questions to the
Minister, those are the observations on behalf of the
Opposition. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And thank you,
Honourable Minister and Deputy Premier.

Thank you.
Does any other Member wish to make a contribution?
Any other Member?
There is no other Member , Minister.
Hon. Walter H. Roban: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.
There seemed to be two questions there, actual questions from the Honourable Member. As it r elates to the percentage proposed for the coming year,
that has been reduced by 0.05 per cent.
One thing I think the Honourable Member
perhaps does not appreciate, or perhaps the Member
does, but I am happy to explain it. Each year the regulator produces a work plan which outlines the work and objective it has for each year. That work plan is
circulat ed for consultation to the licensed [electronic]
providers as well. So they get an opportunity to comment on the objectives of the regulator for the year
and both sectors. So, they do get comment on their
performance and their work and what they are pla nning to do. They, [the Regulatory Authority] also clearly assess the performance and are required by law to
get information on the financial performance of each
sector licensee as well. If the revenue for that sector goes down, that should also be factored i nto the assessment that they do for their own operations.
The regulator need only raise fees or raise
revenue for the work that needs to be done. So, if
there is not a need to automatically always get more
money from the sector, they will not do so. They have
to justify their operations and their revenue targets as
well. So in keeping with what has been the overall
performance of the industry for the period, their a djustment [is] down in light of the greater picture of ev eryone has had to take a hit as a r esult of COVID -19
and the change of the economic environment. [As] the
providers [also took an economic hit] the Regulatory Authority makes the appropriate adjustment accor dingly. Because they need only raise enough revenue
so that it can effectively perform its statutory requir ements. So that is the rationale from which these fees
operate and its assessment has been assessed down
to reflect that.
I do not know if there was another question. I
think that really was the chief question of the Honourable Mem ber. He mentioned something about the
spectrum and he said that this was more clear.

Yes. Yes, that is my question.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Yes, yes. And I think if you
remember what I said in the Statement, it is a spectrum of less demand. There are other areas of spectrum that are in higher demand. But this is the directed
toward the frequencies that are in less demand so that
we can promote some usage of those bands. And we
hope as the telecommunications industry has seen some growth in . . . particularly we have had some
additional licences issued over the last few years that we will look to kind of push people toward using the less demand spectrum, as we anticipate there will be
growth in telecommunications.

With that said, Members, that brings us
to a close to the third item for today.
Members, the fourth item is probably one of
the lengthiest . . . or probably will be a lengthy item for
today. And I am looking at the clock and there is
probably about seven or eight minutes left until this period is recessed for lunch. I am going to make the
suggestion that we break for lunch now and come
back at two o’clock so we can go uninterrupted into the presentation for that matter wh ich I assume will be
a lengthy presentation.
Are there any objections to that?

Hon. E. David Burt: No, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I move that this Honourable
House do now adjourn until 2:00 pm after lunch (if I
may).

Good afternoon, Members. It is now
two o’clock. I trust everyone enjoyed their lunch. We
are now about to resume the session for today.
When we broke this morning we had completed the first three items on the Order Paper, and we were about to start the fourth item, which is the second reading of the Cannabis Licensing Act 2022. However, there is a section that I need to read before
we start this.
So, Minister, are you ready?

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Can you
see me?

1182 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly The Speaker: I hear you; but I do not see you right
now.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Okay, just a second.

Just before I turn the floor over to you
again, let me say . . . and this is a formality that has t o
be done with a Bill of this nature that has been to the other Chamber and sent back. So let me just put the
proper perspective on it before we start.
Please be advised that the Cannabis Licensing Bill attached is identical to the Bill that was not passed in the Senate in accordance with
1section 38
of the Bermuda Constitution, save for the change of the year from 2021 to 2022. Minister, would you like to introduce your Bill
now?

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And
just for the public’s i nformation, I am bringing this Bill
on behalf of the Attorney General, the Honourable
Kathy Lynn Simmons, the Minister of Legal Affairs and
Constitutional Reform. I am carrying this Bill on her
behalf today.
So that the listening public is aware, this Bil l
remains within her Ministry and responsibility. But I
am carrying it on her behalf and on behalf of the Go vernment.
Mr. Speaker, I move that the Bill entitled the
Cannabis Licensing Act 2022 be now read a second
time.

Are there any objecti ons to that?
There are none. Continue, Minister.

BILL

SECOND READING

CANNABIS LICENSING ACT 2022

Hon. Walter H. Roban: And just to reiterate your
point, Mr. Speaker, that this is a section 38 process
that we are following, and this is the same Bill that
would have been tabled in the previous [Meeting] and it is being brought back according to that section [of

1 Restriction on powers of Senate as to other public bills the Constitution]. It is the same Bill, other than the
date change as you described, and to remind people
that this is a licensing Bill that creates the Authority
and the regime that will govern the Authority. And
some of the other matters, some of which would have been raised in the previous debate, will be satisfied
through regulations which will come later and they are
being shaped. But they can only be shaped and done
following the passage of this legislation.
So, Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this Honour able House to take up the Bill entitled the Cannabis
Licensing Act 2022, and move that it be now read a
second time.
I wish I could say . . . and, Mr. Speaker, I will
say that I am seeking to emulate the voice of the el oquent Attorney General. So I hope I do her justice in
the presentation of this brief.
I wish I could say that I am pleased, as I
would usually do, that we are debating this m uchneeded reform Bill. However, Mr. Speaker, Honour able Members will recall passing this Bill on 9 February 2021. The Bill was then defeated in another place on 3 March 2021 by a vote of five ayes to six nays. O pposition Senators and Independent Senators voted
together against the Bill.
The structural limitations of the parliamentary
process which would allow an unelected body of the
Upper House to strike down legislation passed by
democratically elected Members of this Honourable
House are now clearly in stark view. In legalise, that is
called a “democratic deficit.” All modern societies in the Westminster tradition are reforming laws to close
democratic deficits and to put decision- making closer
to the people and in the hands of actors with the peo-ple’s agency. The democratically expressed will of the
people of this country must be paramount and pursued even though the process and balance of power
is flawed.
I can go on about the reasons why the other
place was written into our 1968 Constitution Order, but then I would be accused of agitating the house on
the Hill and their handlers who sit on another cont inent. Needless to say, Mr. Speaker, despite its detrac-tors, this Bill remains legally sound, and the underl ying policy is unassailable if the Bill is t aken as a whole
for what it is and what the regulated cannabis fram ework will become once it is fully implemented. It is no
longer feasible for us as a country to bury our heads
in the sand on the issue of cannabis reform. The drug problem will not magical ly disappear if this Bill does
not become law. It is absolutely derelict for us as a society, for all that we know about the health, social
and economic costs of the illicit cannabis market and
drug addiction, to leave cannabis in the hands of cri minal ele ments.
That is the stark reality of the status quo.
Collectively, we have to know and understand
this reality. Drug interdiction and law enforcement still
disproportionately target one segment of society. That
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1183

Bermuda House of Assembly too is indisputable. For all the nay -sayer s in this Ho nourable House, and in the other place, there have
been no substantive suggestions for amendments to
the Bill for enhancement where they believe it could
be improved. It is intellectually lazy for parliamentar ians to vote the whole Bill down wi thout actually debating the provisions in the Bill or being counted one by
one on the record for their position on why the clauses
of the Bill are not supported or why the Bill should not
become law.
Mr. Speaker, on this occasion, some 12
months later, this Bill is again before us. We have the opportunity to showcase to the public and to those
watching from afar that this Honourable House will not
be supressed, repressed, or oppressed as the Gov-ernment advances its election platform and Throne
Speech initi atives.
Mr. Speaker, with that said, the statement
made in this Honourable House during the original
debate on this Bill still pertains. For the record, I will
now deliver the same speech with only modifications necessary to make it up to date.
Mr. Speak er, the Cannabis Licensing Act
2022 ushers in a new regulatory regime, licensing all
activities involved directly or ancillary to the cultiv ation, import, export, production, sale, supply, use or transport of cannabis or medicinal cannabis or prod-ucts deri ved from cannabis or medicinal cannabis in
Bermuda. The Bill establishes the Cannabis Licensing Authority to be the statutory regulator to oversee the
issuance of licences, inspection, compliance and e nforcement of the cannabis licensing regime.
The Author ity will also make recommendations to the Minister responsible for Drug Prevention
on related policy issues and the administration of the
Act. Provisions in the Bill will permit lawful activities
relating to the cannabis plant, medicinal cannabis,
cannabis products and cannabis -infused food products.
Mr. Speaker, this Honourable House has before it today a multi -faceted and transformative Bill of
significant national importance. Before I detail the schematics of the Bill, allow me to put on record the full policy context and the Government’s objectives of
a regulated cannabis regime.
Liberalising Bermuda’s cannabis laws is certainly long overdue. This is undeniable in a society
and a world awakening to an inflection point in dis cussions about [systemic ] racialised disparities and ine quities within institutions, laws and policies, Bermuda’s
own peaceful Black Lives Matter demonstration in
2020 when this Bill was being drafted show that 7,000
people took to the streets amidst a backdrop of a
global pandemic and physical distancing rules to demand better. This is a historic marker for the ages t hat
transformative change by Government is necessary
when tackling issues of Black disparity .
Mr. Speaker, we can all remember a time
when Bermudian society was not alway s so even-tempered when demanding rights for marginalised
groups. Bermuda’s civil uprisings of the 1960s and
1970s cannot be recounted without acknowledging
that cannabis prohibition laws were used as one of the
many tools by the Colonial Government and po lice to
quell Black disquiet and to systemically criminalise
Blacks on the front lines of the racial progress mov ements.
Many of our own families, if not some of the
very Members who have served in this Honourable
House, were directly impacted by the hist oric stain of
colonialism and the oppression of a White oligarchy. If
Black lives truly matter, Mr. Speaker, we should not
hasten to recognise, deconstruct and reform laws,
institutions, and systems that have racialised and
[have been] harmful to Blacks. C rises are often the
precursor to revolutionary change . And we are in an
unprecedented economic crisis demanding radical new thinking. Increasingly, cannabis legalisation is not
that radical at all.
Mr. Speaker, our 49- year-old Misuse of Drugs
Act 1972 is a carbon copy of the Misuse of Drugs Act
of 1971 in the United Kingdom. Strict drug controls
which were duplicated across the British Empire
based on an imperfect Nixon- era war on drugs originated out of the United States with its specific use of
marijuana enforcement laws to demonise and crim inalise Blacks and Latinos in their country. The great
Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, [ Jr.], in his 1963 Le tter from the Birmingham Jail gifted humanity with his
perspective: “I submit that an individual who breaks a
law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who wil lingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to
arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for
law.”
The unjust colonial legacy of our l ocal laws
has not been fully dismantled after generations of
Black Bermudians being incarcerated for minor can-nabis infractions. As the entry point to our reforms,
cannabis prohibition laws, designed to help society
feel safe and secure, have undoubtedly had enduring
damaging social, economic and health effects upon
our small community. The impact of the enforcement
of cannabis laws in Bermuda is disproportionately borne by Black Bermudians.
These costs of prohibition controls are no
longer justifiable by m odern standards and contemporary science. Criminalising cannabis, primarily through
enforcement of personal use offenc es in the Misuse of
Drugs Act 1972, is ineffective, costly, and represents
poor public policy in contemporary anti -colonial and
antiracist theories. Evidence of the tangible human
cost hides in plain sight within our justice system: i nequities and disparities based on race and police stops and arrest data, drug- related crime rates, prosecutions for cannabis offences, and our prison popul ation. Black males are over -represented in all relevant
metrics, even though it is proven Blacks are not more
1184 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly prone to drug use, or cannabis use, specifically, than
any other racial group.
Collateral consequences cause separation
and breakdown of families and personalised trauma
within families affected by cannabis enforcement.
Cannabis users and persons convicted of cannabis
offences are endlessly excluded from jobs, housing
and travel.
Mr. Speaker, to underscore this point, a clear
thread recognising the very same racialised social
disparities and the social economic impact is woven
through the findings of the Clark Report of 1978, the
Pitt Report of 1978, th e Gurr Report of 1984, the Arc hibald Report of 1986, the National Drug Strategy Pr oposal of 1991, and t he Tumin Report of 1992, among
others. Looking back at the recommendations in these seminal reports demonstrates that our society must
collectively confront, interrogate, and dialogue with
our past using today’s knowledge, respectful of the
aspirations of future generations.
It is undeniable that cannabis use is part of
Bermuda’s culture, despite it being unlawful to trade,
share or even to use. Cannabis use is common at s ocial and football matches and, certainly, at Cup Match
and other large public events. Essentially, unlawful
use happens in plain sight for police officers who are
unable to effectively enforce cannabis laws at such events.
The illegal market in cannabis is estimated to
be valued at between $6 million and $6.5 million. This
puts tremendous strain on public resources through
enforcement, criminal justice, and the health system.
Mr. Speaker, the drug data supporting the Gover nment policy is captured in the Bermuda Drug Infor-mation Network 2018 Annual Report [BerDIN]. I will
highlight some of t he salient figures.
In the reporting year 2017, some 71,160
grams of cannabis were seized— plants, resins, seeds
and edibles. This accounted for 84.5 per cent of all
drug seizures by weight. Criminal trials for cannabis
possession were at 56 with a total of 18 trials for cannabis possession with intent to supply. Contrastingly,
convictions for cannabis offences were reported as
follows : possession, 47 convictions; intent to supply,
10 convictions; importation, 14 convictions; and cult ivation, 2 convictions. Only 11 per cent of all total drug arrests in 2017 were for importation offences.
For the fiscal year of 2017/18 a total estimate
of $9 million was spent on drug treatment; $770,000 on drug prevention; and $5.7 million spent on drug
enforcement and interdi ction. Historically, the cumul ative government spending for drug use issues is ap-proximately $15.5 million per year. Cannabis enforcement is overly represented in the drain on these
government resources.
Further, Mr. Speaker, when analysing the
prison popu lation in 2017, at least 94 trials for cannabis offences were initiated. Most of those accused
would have spent some time in custody, either on r e-mand or after conviction. The annual cost of housing a
prisoner is recorded at $70,000 per year or $5,800 per
month. It is also noteworthy that the recorded primary
drug for those seeking treatment in order of prev alence were: opioids, cocaine, and cannabis. Yet, the
order of prevalence reverses once persons are incar-cerated, with cannabis overtaking cocaine and op ioids. This suggests the accessibility of cannabis contraband within the prison population.
Mr. Speaker, the status quo has not been effective at deterring illegal consumption and trade in cannabis by any matrix. When faced with the paradox
of these truths, how does a society progress from
cannabis prohibition to legislation? Thinking of it as a
continuum, the stages of cannabis laws reform are:
total prohibition, decriminalisation, regulated medicinal
cannabis, partial legislation via a strict licensing r egime, legalisation with a light touch regulation, and full
legalisation without regulation.
Currently, Bermuda has partial decriminalis ation of cannabis as persons are permitted to possess
7 grams of cannabis without criminal penalty since December 2017. Hemp and CBD formulations are
also legalised in Bermuda since November 2019. The
legal definition of hemp is purposefully defined to i nclude cannabis which contains concentrations of not
more than 1 per cent THC. Further, approved medic inal cannabis pharmaceuticals like Marinol, Cesamet
and Sativex are lawfully available for prescription in
Bermuda.
Other formulations of cannabis for medicinal
purposes can be authorised for patients under a l icence by the Minister responsible for the Misuse of Drugs Act 1972. Globally medicinal cannabis is reg ulated or authorised by law in all of North America, most of South America, Western Europe, Australia,
and New Zealand.
Mr. Speaker, this Government’s efforts to take
the next logical steps to establish a regulated medi cinal cannabis regime were curtailed after public feed-back was largely indifferent. Public consultation overwhelmingly showed the public thought the cost, complexity, and proposed bureaucracy outweighed any
likely benefits for limited patients who would partic ipate, or for attracting prospective entrepreneurs and
investors. The overarching call was for bolder steps
toward legalisation of cannabis.
The Government took a deeper look at how
far cannabis reforms could go. Raising the decriminal-isation amount t o above 7 grams of cannabis, similar
to Portugal’s model of wholesale decriminalisation,
was not a feasible option for Bermuda’s size and li mited resources. Therefore, a balancing exercise
acknowledged that full legalisation of cannabis without
a robust regulatory framework might have the uni ntended consequence of increasing cannabis abuse and could negatively impact Bermuda’s pristine repu-tation. Inadequate regulation would neither dissuade
cannabis use nor eliminate the illegal cannabis marOfficial Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1185

Bermuda House of Assembly ket, nor [would it] prevent the known health risks and
associated social harms.
Mr. Speaker, the Government’s conclusion
was that we need a regulated cannabis regime tailored to Bermuda which would improve public health and safety and which is not unjustifiably punitive.
Opening up entrepreneur opportunities for all in the
post COVID -19 economic recovery, including for persons convicted of minor cannabis offences, became a
necessary consideration. Soft -touch regulation was
ruled out because it could not achieve the needed
protections for vulnerable groups and would not sati sfy our national commitment to maintaining our favourable assessment in the mutual evaluation report by
the Caribbean Financial Action Taskforce (CFATF) for
our effective anti -money laundering framework.
Mr. Speaker, the Government is mindful to
ensure that reforms effectively curtail the persistence
of the illegal cannabis market of unknown quality and
potency and that the inherent exploitation within crim inal enterprise would fade over time. The longer ca nnabis use remains criminalised, cannabis users would
largely be out of reach of prevention and risk reduction protocols and treatment services without also being caught up in the criminal justice system.
Mr. Speaker, scientific advances and attitudes
about cannabis now indicate that the health risks of
using cannabis are lower than that of alcohol and t obacco. Dependence potential of cannabis is moderate to low and on par with that of caffeine. However, local
cannabis use data places cannabis and alcohol side
by side as drugs of choice in Bermuda. Reported lif etime consumption rates are at 78.7 per cent for alc ohol, 76.5 per cent for cannabis, and 70.4 per cent for
tobacco.
There is no escaping that alcohol and cannabis are cultural staples in a country w here almost 99
per cent of people admit to taking drugs in their lif etime. Law and policy models around cannabis interventions globally are shifting focus towards identifying
persons at high risk, modifying risk factors and risky
behaviour, and modelling r esponsible use —the same
as for alcohol —instead of outdated criminality focused
models.
Mr. Speaker, the cannabis policy follows the
leading science that signals that health risks for cannabis users are heightened for adolescents, persons
with mental health challenges or a family history of
such, individuals with cardiovascular problems, and
pregnant women. These high- risk factors can be
worsened by initial cannabis use in early adulthood, near daily cannabis use, smoking cannabis plant m aterial, and by cons uming cannabis with excessively
high THC levels. Because illegal cannabis is of u nknown quality or could be laced with other more har mful chemicals or drugs, available data suggests that contamination of street cannabis could be an aggr avating factor. The Cannabis Licensing Bill provisions effectively address each of these perspectives. An objec-tive of the Bill is to restrict access for young persons
and discourage inducements to use cannabis, specif ically [by] persons under 21 [who] are not permitted to
consume or use cannabis under the Bill. It will, ther efore, be an offence to supply or sell cannabis to a person under the age of 21 years of age. I am going to
repeat that, Mr. Speaker, so that people can hear that:
It will, therefore, be an offence to supp ly or sell ca nnabis to a person under the age of 21 years of age.
Licensees will also have a duty to ensure that
persons under 21 are not employed by retail shops
and do not gain access to retail shops and that cannabis or cannabis products from retail shops are not
procured for persons under 21. Applicable of -fences
and penalties are included in the Bill with fines for
non-compliance [being] between $8,000 and $40,000.
Mr. Speaker, examples of other safeguards
provided in the Bill are such that the Minist er may, by
order, exclude harmful strains of cannabis from the licensing regime. Availability of cannabis is being cur-tailed to approved premises meeting strict guidelines,
and clearly prescribed packaging and design are r equired. Supply chains will need t he approval of the
Authority to keep out criminal elements, and mechanisms for policies and resources and enhancing ed ucation, prevention, and treatment for at -risk groups
are also included. Strict security requirements for l icensed facilities and conditions on licences will be
imposed by the Authority.
Mr. Speaker, public education campaigns and
outreach will be promptly executed so that young persons and the general public understand the known
dangers of cannabis in the same manner as we educate on the da ngers of alcohol and tobacco. The D epartment of National Drug Control and the Authority will be tasked with collaborating to design and deliver
effective, targeted, prevention campaigns, improving understanding of drug abuse, and the development of
the bes t possible responses to it.
The intended messaging will emphasise r esponsible adult use and will be sufficiently nuanced so as not to demonise positive uses of cannabis. Public
messaging ought to coincide and reinforce other community -wide values exemplif ied by parents and
family members, educational institutions, and society
generally. In addition, the messaging will promote r esponsible attitudes and beliefs which will provide
young people with the tools to decide on the most
healthy course of action in r egard to the use of pote ntially addictive substances. Research shows that educational programmes focusing on learning how to
manage emotions and stress do better in addressing
the root causes of addiction and dissuading young
people away from using addicti ve sub- stances rather
than direct programmes focusing exclusively on drug
abstinence.
1186 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Speaker, licensed cannabis activities wit hin the Bill’s licensing regime are ultimately designed to
allow adults to access regulated, quality -controlled
cannabis plant material, medicinal cannabis, cannabis products and cannabis -infused food products for m edicinal and personal use. The licence categories are
as follows:
• a tier 1 cultivation licence, to allow for the growing, harvesting, drying, trimming or curing
of cannabis for adult personal use;
• a tier 2 cultivation licence, to allow for the
growing, harvesting, drying, trimming, curing
or packaging of cannabis for medicinal cannabis for commercial purposes;
• a cannabis retail shop licence, to allow for the operation of a cannabis retail shop for the sale
of cannabis or the sale and consumption of cannabis;
• an import licence, to allow for the cannabis
and medicinal cannabis planting material for
cultivation from any country from which it is
lawful to do so;
• a tier 1 manufacturing licence, to allow for activities relating to the processing of edible
cannabis;
• a tier 2 manufacturing licence, to allow for the
manufacturing of cannabis products or medi cinal cannabis products;
• an export licence , to allow for the export of l ocally cultivated cannabis to a country in which it is lawful to do so;
• a research licence, to allow for the conduct of
scientific research relating to the development
of medicinal cannabis;
• a transport licence, to allow for the transport
of cannabis or medicinal cannabis in Berm uda; and
• a cannabis event licence, to allow for the sale and supply of cannabis at authorised private
or public events of an infrequent, but temporary, nature.
Mr. Speaker, collectively, the proposed Bill
creates strict national regulation of cannabis to be enforced by the Authority and police, each empowered
under the Bill to control and regulate cannabis within
the framework. HM Customs Department Officers r etain their role and powers for protecting our borders
from drug traff icking. I want to repeat that as well: HM
Customs Department Officers retain their role and
powers for protecting our borders from drug traffic king. Ongoing cooperation between agencies will con-tinue under the Bill and is essential for the integrity of the regime.
Mr. Speaker, another dimension of the Bill is
that the associated licence fees are designed to avoid
a situation of champagne for the few instead of water
for all— to borrow an African expression from Thomas
Sankara. It is a priority of this Gover nment to prioritise
economic access to the licensing regime for all seg-ments of our society. Licensing fees are accessible and affordable, ranging from $500 for a tier 1 cultiv ation licence, $500 for a transport licence, and $750 for
a private cannabis event [licence]. On the higher end
of the licensing regime, entrepreneurs can opt for r etail shop licences and research licences at $10,000 or
a tier 2 commercial cultivation licence for $6,000.
Mr. Speaker, the Bill presented is the culmination of a comprehensive social justice reform project which includes extensive consultation and stakeholder
engagement from entities and experts across health, law enforcement, finance and justice. The final iter ation of the initiative began during the previous legisl ative term, with the Government renewing its promise
for cannabis reform in the 2020 Speech from the
Throne. The policy behind the Bill was informed by a
substantive public consultation throughout the policy development phases and included the presentation of
an illustrated draft Bill. The final public consultation
exercise closed on July 3, [2020], with over 500 com-ments made by approximately 150 members of the
public, stakeholders, and affected entities.
The public consultation not only showed large
numbers of supportive comments and ideas for i mprovement, it showed there is an over -whelming appetite for changes to our cannabis laws and that the
populace generally accepts that cannabis should be
available lawfully under a licensed regime. The public feedback c an be chiefly described as supporting the
licensing system. Most contributors gave views and
insights into particular provisions or shared their individual opinions for or against the different policy o ptions being pursued. There were less than a handful
of persons holding against a regulated cannabis r egime as proposed.
Most opposing attitudes offered explanations
and suggestions. Certainly, all contributions were constructive, thoughtful, and valuable. Mr. Speaker,
not surprisingly the quality of some consultation sub-missions uncovered substantial local cannabis expertise waiting in the shadows and margins of society to
take root. It is anticipated that our homegrown experts
are readying themselves to start their local cannabis
operations.
Mr. Speaker, on 2 December 2020 the UN
Commission on Narcotic Drugs decided by 27 votes to 25, with one abstention, to delete cannabis and cannabis resin from Schedule IV of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, the listing of the most
harmful [psychotropic] dru gs. The UK Government
voted in favour of this change.
Mr. Speaker, with this change by the United
Nations’ oversight bodies they radically removed
some of the structural hurdles in emerging cannabis
industries globally. It effectively allows for greater n ational competence for signatories to enact legislation to allow increased medicinal, scientific and industrial uses of cannabis without falling afoul of the three m ajor international narcotics conventions. The reclassif iOfficial Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1187

Bermuda House of Assembly cation of cannabis was resulted fro m World Health
Organization [WHO] recommendations, recognising
therapeutic and treatment benefits of cannabis, further
indicating that it is not liable to produce ill effects sim ilar to other drugs in Schedule IV, such as heroin, fentanyl and opioids.
Mr. Speaker, the Government is aware that
United Nations Treat ies oversight body, the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), has articulated
the limitation that domestic laws of cannabis can only
be allowed for medicinal, scientific, and industrial pur-poses. The Bill [before us ] goes to permit lawful uses
of cannabis for personal adult use and other licensed
activities. In doing so, the Bill’s provisions will exceed
the prescribed limits of the various narcotics conven-tions. I want to repeat that as wel l: In doing so, the
Bill’s provisions will exceed the prescribed limits of the various narcotics conventions.
The Government of Bermuda is pursuing all
diplomatic and legal options to deliver on its promise
to our people, fully cognisant of the UK’s role to e nsure compliance with International Narcotics Conventions extended to Bermuda. However, Bermuda, as a
small overseas territory of the UK, democratically desires for social, cultural, and public health reasons to
chart its own distinct course in the dif ficult area of
cannabis reform, while adhering to international law to
the greatest extent possible.
Mr. Speaker, Bermuda is a non- state party to
the Narcotics Conventions; the conventions are extended to us by the United Kingdom Government. I nternational law requires that territorial application of
treaty obligations of signatory state parties requires the consent of the territory government. The UK Government and Government House ha ve confirmed
support for Bermuda’s policy and legislation only so
far as i t does not contravene the UK’s international
obligations. To be clear, the Governor has indicated
that she will be unable to assent to any legislation that
contravenes our international obligations.
Mr. Speaker, it is worth noting that the UK are
already entangled in a diplomatic stalemate with the
British Virgin Islands because of Her Majesty’s Go vernment’s refusal to assent to two cannabis related
Bills. The BVI’s Cannabis Licensing Act, 2020, would
open up commercial opportunities related to medicinal cannabis in the territory. Also, the BVI’s Drugs (Pr evention of Misuse) Amendment Act, 2020, would decriminalise possession of small amounts of cannabis
and erase some previous convictions. It is reported
that the UK is withholding assent because they were
not consulted during the Bill’s development and to secure a Memorandum of Understanding granting the
UK Government a binding role in the territory’s licensing authority.
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Bermuda has
consulted with the UK Government and Gover nment
House during our law’s development. I will say that
again, Mr. Speaker: the Government of Bermuda has consulted with the UK Government and Government
House during our law’s development. As previously
stated, Bermuda has already passed laws to decrim inalise small amounts of cannabis, and medicinal can-nabis is already available under our existing law. Should the UK Government take the same approach
for Bermuda as they have in the BVI, the Government
of Bermuda will have to reconsider the terms of its
consent to the Narcotics Convention.
Mr. Speaker, the mutuality of Bermuda’s rel ationship with the UK requires the UK Government to support the democratic aspirations of Bermuda by
representing our interests in the international arena,
insulating Bermuda fr om any potential INCB [International Narcotics Control Board] sanctions. Even
though we are officially represented by the UK Go vernment at the international level, Bermuda’s own
voice on issues which affect our political, economic or
financial interests must be represented. This was a
position framed as far back as the tenure of Sir E dward Trenton Richards, Bermuda’s first Black Government Leader from 1971 to 1973, and then Premier from 1973 to 1975.
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear, Bermuda is met
with a dile mma —continue to wait for the INCB and
other state parties to catch up to modern attitudes on
cannabis and miss the opportunity to deliver a real change and economic opportunities for our people, or to meet the potential international challenges head on.
The road to progress is never perfect. Progress
comes at a cost. The legendary US Congressman
John Lewis, best known for his lockstep advocacy alongside Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., powerfully
tweeted in June 2018: “Never . . . be afraid to make
some noise and get in good trouble, necessary trouble.” Defending Bermuda’s democratic policy position
on cannabis on the international front is the type of
“trouble” this Government is not afraid to make.
Mr. Speaker, Bermuda can be confident that
the pathway to a r egulated cannabis legal framework
has been trail -blazed by Canada and 36 states within
the United States of America. Other jurisdictions further afield, like Uruguay, have a completely regulated
cannabis sector with Mexico’s legal cannabis industry
expected to come on line by the end of 2021. R emarkably, Mexico’s legalisation was driven by a S upreme Court ruling that cannabis use falls under co nstitutionally protected modes of individual self -
expression and that country’s desire to eradicate drug
cartels.
Canada and the USA [by] enacting domestic
laws permitting personal adult use of cannabis and creating regulatory frameworks for can nabis industry
are in the position of respectful non- compliance in r egard to the International Narcotics Convent ions. No twithstanding, neither country has been subject to any
sanction by the INCB despite Canada being called an international rebel and the INCB declaring its legislated regime to be weakening the drug treaty framework.
1188 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly Respectfully, it would be disinge nuous for the INCB to
take a hardline approach against Bermuda’s cannabis
laws in the face of two G7 state parties to the conve ntions notoriously in non- compliance with their treaty
obligations.
Mr. Speaker, the cannabis policy and laws
emanating from the Americas and Caribbean region
are more coherent with local views and culture. Pre -
vailing views in these regions, like those in Bermuda,
recognise that contemporary science and risk -based
harm reduction strategies are far more effective at
preventing cann abis misuse and illegal trades in cannabis than a prohibition only approach advocated by
the INCB. The cannabis laws from the model jurisdi ctions informing this Bill are sensibly consistent with the
overall objective and purpose of the narcotics conve ntions, that is, to be concerned with the health and welfare of mankind. This is per recital to the 1961 Single
Convention on Narcotic Drugs.
This Government believes that a regulated
cannabis industry, even one which permits respons ible adult use, has greater likelihood of safeguarding the health and welfare of our population than the st atus quo, systems that criminalise users and continue
to proliferate despite all the best law enforcement efforts.
Mr. Speaker, I expect this Bill will receive b ipartisan support. Let me explain why. Despite the rainbow coalition of candidates run by the One Bermuda Alliance in the 2020 election, they collectively
failed to address cannabis reforms or even examine
the impact of drug enforcement or drug use in their
election plat form. Fanciful buzz headings in their plat -
form, such as, “equitable wealth creation,” “restorative
justice,” and “social contract,” they remained silent on
the subject of cannabis reforms and without any su bstantive discussion or critique of the Government’s
policy intentions.
At the time of the election cannabis reforms
had been widely reported on, two public consultation
exercises had been completed, and two illustrative
Bills have been laid in the legislature for public and
parliamentary scrutiny. In f act, cannabis is referenced
only once in the OBA’s 2020 party platform and there
is no reference to drug policy generally. I dare you to
search.
And what, you ask, was the singular cannabis
issue the opposition party was focused on? I quote,
“Re-examining cannabis growing legislation to ensure
that any [legalisation] would provide real entrepr eneurial opportunities.” The failure to engage meaningfully on cannabis reform in the OBA’s platform, we
contend, was trailed by their silence on cannabis r eforms in the Opposition’s Reply to the Throne Speech
under the new party leader, who sits as the Honour able Member for constituency 8.
Mr. Speaker, if I may, let me also cast our
memories back to 2014. That was when the Honour able Member from constituency 10 held the portfolio of Minister of National Security. In January of that year
the Honourable Member is on record “rubbishing” the
PLP Opposition’s proposals to decriminalise small
amounts of cannabi s. He spoke publicly calling decriminalisation reckless and that he would “refuse to
believe that this is s upported by the people of Berm uda.” Yet, by November the OBA had changed tack
proposing policies to allow for approved medicinal
cannabis pharmaceuticals and giving wider police di scretion to caution first -time ca nnabis possession of -
fenders in his 2014 Throne Speech.
Also, that same year, the OBA Government
commissioned and supported a comprehensive analysis of cannabis reform in Bermuda by a group called
the Cannabis Reform Collaborative. That group’s fin dings and recommendations, published in April 2014 in a 137- page report, by and large captures the policies
of this Government’s cannabis reforms, including the
social justice and social equity underpinnings to ca nnabis reforms. One month after that report’s publ ication, the Honourable Member was appointed Premier,
retaining the portfolio of National Security.
So, what exactly did the OBA do while in government to advance cannabis reforms? Did they
shelve the report? Was it simply an exercise to pl acate or garner Black support? We do not know.
I leave it to the Opposition Members to explain their party’s half -baked position on cannabis and
inertia on implementing the substantive reforms recommended in 2014 report they commissioned. They
can choose to rise today, bang their pots and pans in
a display of white lash against the Bill or, if their conscience allows . . . But in reality the Opposition have
no real standing to oppose the policy changes in this Bill because they [gave] no input during its develo pment and t hey repeatedly failed to deliver on meaningful cannabis reform during their term in Gover nment.
Whatever the OBA’s position today, Mr.
Speaker, they never had the public trust to advance
credible reforms on cannabis. Incontestably, it is the
PLP Government who possessed the legitimacy and
audacity to progress cannabis reforms on a resounding mandate by the people of this country.
Mr. Speaker, political dynamics aside, cannabis has already gone main stream. Industries are emerging and growing steadily in all of our gateway
neighbours. We have fixed our gaze towards Canada’s and the USA’s example. We are bold enough to
chart our own course to create economic opportunities
for our citizens. The Bill presented opens the door for a viable, vibrant and equitable cannabis industry in
Bermuda. There will not be large monopolies dominating the industry. Let me say that again: There will not
be large monopolies dominating the industry. We
have designed a framework that encourages entry to
the business for small and m edium -sized entrepr eneurs as well as large companies.
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1189

Bermuda House of Assembly Overall, the Bill accomplishes an agile regul atory framework for cannabis in Bermuda that can grow
in line with the evolutionary needs of local industry
and can be further adapted as cannabis regulator y
models emerge globally.
Mr. Speaker, constructing an entirely new
regulated industry is not altogether unlike building a
house. This Bill represents the tent, foundation, walls
and roof needed to shore up the cannabis industry in
Bermuda. The legislation cannot possibly, at this
stage, capture every eventuality, answer every tec hnical challenge the industry may face, or be tailored to
match the myriad of business proposals [imagined].
And as we know, Mr. Speaker, from the legi slative process, that is ho w most legislation starts and it
is followed by regulations that create the technical specifics around how the Bill should operate. So we
know that is how legislation works.
Continuing with the same metaphor, the expert tradesperson, such as industry exper ts, entrepr eneurs, investors, the banking industry, the Office of the National Anti -Money Laundering Committee, and
the Authority will be able to influence the future design of added specifics within the existing licensing regime.
Each of these stakeholder groups will have the benefit
of the clear regulatory framework of the Bill to inform
their due diligence and risk analysis before participat-ing or discharging their operational mandate with r egard to the cannabis market. With their expertise, they will ha ve the best understanding of the potential risks
associated with any ambiguities in the licensing r egime; identify ways of improving security issues, saf eguards, and dynamics from within the specific areas they operate.
Thus, Mr. Speaker, regulation- makin g powers
are included within the legislation, allowing the Mini ster responsible to make specific and general regul ations to enhance the regulated licensing regime. Add itionally, the principal Act can be amended by regul ation to include future development. By modelling our
framework on the Canadian model, Bermuda can also
rely on Canada’s experience with regard to maintai ning its high anti -money laundering rating, notwit hstanding its legalised cannabis industry. Applying the
Canadian lessons will ensure that our Mutual Evalu ation Report by the Caribbean Financial Action Task
Force (CFATF) continues to demonstrate our effective
anti-money laundering compliance.
Mr. Speaker, the totality of the proposed legi slation provide a better effective regulatory control
framework for cannabis to displace the illicit market,
protect the youth and vulnerable persons, and finally, redress legacy harms afflicting Black families. It pr ovides fair and equitable access to participate in the
proposed market at a time when the ec onomy and
families are suffering and searching for new economic
activities and opportunities. The passage of this Bill
and the future implementation will deliver the greatest
good for the greatest number. With those remarks, Mr. Speaker, I move that
the B ill be committed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I was going to say that this is
déjà vu all over again. The same Bill that we saw a
year ago, last February, is back again with very few, if
any, changes. What has changed is only the year on the face of the Bill. What has also changed, of course,
is that we do not have the Attorney General presenting the speech today to the Honourable House, al though we had a very similar, if not verbatim, speech
presented by the Honourable Deputy Premier.
So, here we are. Déjà vu; nothing has
changed. And unfortunat ely that gives the impression
that the Government is not listening because there are severe problems with this Bill that could and, respec tfully, should have been addressed in the intervening period, problems that have been highlighted by those in the thir d sector, problems that have been highlighted by the Opposition, problems that have been highlighted by the Bermudian people.
And it is a shame that efforts have not been
taken to try to get more people on board so that what
is being passed today, and in all probability it will be
passed because the Government has the votes, could be a Bill that far more people could support on our
Island.
Mr. Speaker, getting to the heart of the matter,
this is a difficult issue. And it is made more difficult by
the fac t that this Bill is not just about the legalisation of
cannabis. Indeed, the legalisation of cannabis is not
really foursquare at the front of the Bill. At the front of
the Bill is a licensing regime. It is about process. It is
about how it will happen. And the Opposition OBA
respectfully suggests that the process that is being proposed is a bad one. We believe this to be a bad
Bill.
Mr. Speaker, as we are in déjà vu land, if I
could ask your leave just to read from the Hansard a very brief passage from what I said on the last occ asion, it is this:
2“If you are a believer in the prohibition
against cannabis, if you believe that drug use and
abuse erodes the very fabric of our society, then this
Bill is not for you. Because this Bill will legalise ca n2 Official Hansard Report, 19 February 2021, page
419
1190 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly nabis and, in all probability, it will lead to increased
drug use.”
Alternatively, “[i]f you are a believer in decri minalisation of cannabis, if you believe that it is wrong
for people to be incarcerated or criminalised for can-nabis use, then this Bill is also not for you. Cannabis
is already decriminalised in Bermuda, it was decrim inalised” (by way of a Bill) “in 2017. This Bill does not hing to alter that. Decriminalisation” (of up to 7 grams)
“has already happened.
“If you are a believer in full [legalisation] of
cannabis, if you believe that adults should have the freedom of choice to use cannabis where and when
they wish, then this Bill is also not for you, because
this Bill is not about freedom of choice.”
Mr. Speaker, I repeat what I said then because it remains true now. Nothing has changed. And, yes, it is a difficult issue and we respectfully suggest
that this Bill is not the answer. As I said, at its heart
this Bill is about licensing. And licensing is about who
controls flows and ultimately about mone y. It is about
who controls manufacture, importation. It is about control of [ cannabis ] use. And I say that because not all
Bermudians may appreciate that what we are debating today is about that. Most Bermudians, quite understandably will see this Bill as simply an up/down
choice on the use of cannabis in Bermuda permitted
by the law.
As Bermudians we are divided on this issue.
And it helps us on the Hill here to appreciate that we
are divided because it is not so simple as to attack the
opposite viewpoint as being mere sophistry. People
have genuinely and authentically held disagreements about this issue and they are not wrong to do so. On
the one hand, Mr. Speaker, there is the issue of civil
liberties. And I would emphasise that this Bill is not
about t he people’s plants, it is about corporate cannabis. It is about the mechanisms, the control of cannabis. And those who believe that this is really just the
liberalisation across the Island that will allow them to
do whatever they want to do will be severel y mista ken.
As to personal liberties, I believe the best approach in life is on the basis that, within reason, adults should be able to do what they want to do. And we are
supportive of the idea of personal liberty. And la wmakers must always step back and take a look at
whether any law we pass here is unduly limiting on
personal freedoms. Where there is a tug of war b etween citizen and state, at least for my part, I tend to side with the individual.
The Opposition very much agrees that it is
unhelpful to punish people criminally for cannabis use.
And during the presentation to this Honourable House
the Honourable Deputy Premier said this (as I read
from the Hansard): “So, what exactly did the OBA do while in government to advance cannabis reforms?”
Well, th at question, Mr. Speaker, may be rhetorical.
But let me answer it. When they were in Government . . . and I was
not in that Government, I arrived after the fact and I
am late to the scene. But the OBA tabled a Bill in
2017 to decriminalise the use of cannabis up to
7 grams and it passed the House in May of 2017. So
that is what they did. It never got to the Senate because there was an election in July 2017. So, that is
what they did and that is the position. And the position
remains the same, that the OBA is supportive of the
concept of decriminalisation. And for those who want to take a look and point out the 7 gram amount, well that is a legitimate conversation that could be had.
So, I think you should know if you support this
legislation . . . you should be aware that this Bill is not
changing the 7 gram limit under the 2017 Act unless
you pay for a licence. Likewise, to grow marijuana at
home will require a licence. The Bill provides for an
application fee of $250 and a licence fee of $500. But
if you wa nt to smoke in your own home, this Bill has
serious issues.
And for those who have not paid attention, I
would like them to look at the clauses of the Bill. I will
not read out the clauses because I did that last time
and I was told off for doing so in a debate. But look at
the clauses that limit what you can grow in your own
home. Look at the clauses that prescribe who can e nter your home to inspect, to take photos, to establish the boundaries of your property. This legislation is not free and easy. If you are out there standing on the hill
advocating for personal liberties, this Bill is not for
you.
Looked at carefully, this Bill does not enhance
personal freedoms. You cannot, for example, smoke
in unlicensed places. This is a not a Bill that when it
passes will allow you to smoke on the beach or as you
walk down the street. And as was pointed out by a
number of speakers when this Bill came before the
House last time, this Bill does not address the US stop
list in any way.
It also, Mr. Speaker, seeks to r egulate the
strength of the licensed cannabis that will be sold. And
that begs the question, what will happen to those who
wish a stronger strain of weed? What will happen to
those who are under 25 years old and may wish to
smoke? Well, the answer as we al l must appreciate is
that the black market will be there and it will thrive.
Likewise, we see this Bill prohibiting anyone
working in a new shop if they are under the age of 21. So, if a bar down anywhere in town were to add as
part of their product cannabis sales, they would act ually have to get rid of anyone working for them under
the age of 21. So, it could be a job reduction. So, that is looked at through the lens of personal freedoms
and civil liberties, Mr. Speaker. And that is important,
because, as I say, when it comes between the citizen
and the state, more often than not it is best to come down on the side of the citizen because he or she of-ten needs your help.
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1191

Bermuda House of Assembly But we as parliamentarians cannot just look at
it through the lens of the individual. W e cannot just
say, This is what I would do , because that is not our
role. Our role is broader than that. We have to look at
what is best for society as a whole. And let me turn then, Mr. Speaker, to those who have concerns about
this Bill—and there are man y. And those concerns are
authentic and legitimate.
Mr. Speaker, it is uncontroversial and hard to
ignore that drugs can do major damage and do [inflict]
major damage to human beings. I spoke last year in the debate and I will mention it briefly again. I have
witnessed first -hand in my own family the problems of
addiction. I have family members who are no longer alive today because of addiction. Personally, for me, Mr. Speaker, the most disappointing part of this Bill
. . . and this may surprise you, but t he most disappointing part of this Bill is the lack of funding for coun-selling for those who encounter problems with drug
use. Because there are those who encounter problems with drug use, just as there are those who e ncounter problems with alcohol use. There are people
in need of treatment Island wide.
Mr. Speaker, I am not going to get into the
argument about whether cannabis is physically or psychologically addictive. I am not going to get into
the argument about whether cannabis is a gateway drug. I very much appreciate that there are some out
there who can make arguments that contend that it is
not. And I will defer to the science on those rather
concerning issues. But, Mr. Speaker, back to the Bill. I
have said repeatedly it is not a good Bill, and that is a
shame, because it should be and it could be. But why, Mr. Speaker, why no changes?
Mr. Speaker, when the Cannabis Bill was defeated last year in the Senate, the OBA and I personally highlighted the absence of any funding to combat
addiction issues . And I am very sad to say that not hing has changed. This Government has had a year to think about this. Why do we not see any changes, Mr.
Speaker?
Another concerning issue, Mr. Speaker, is that
this Government seems very excited about picking a
fight wi th Government House and the United Kin gdom. As we know, the United Kingdom is a signatory to the UN [Single] Convention on Narcotic Drugs and it is unfortunate that we would come to loggerheads
with the United Kingdom at a time when the United
Kingdom has been so gracious to us, providing Bermuda with COVID -19 vaccines free of charge and
ahead of much of the rest of the world.
Mr. Speaker, just so that we are clear —
because in debates people tend to try to vilify the position of those opposite them and sometimes to mi scharacterise that position —this Opposition continues
to support decriminalisation and very much believes
that cannabis use should not mean criminal charges.
It is not sensible public policy to lock up people for
smoking marijuana. It fills our jails unnecessarily with those people who should not be in jail and the OBA
believes that.
Likewise, the OBA was proud to introduce legislation in respect to medical marijuana, and we believe that medical marijuana should continue to be
available for those in need. And there is some science
around that, and it has seemed to be helpful to treat
certain ailments, and that is a good thing that it is
available.
But again, we are looking not at philosophical
arguments, but at this Bill. And whether this Bill is a good Bill or a bad Bill depends upon what it seeks to
do and, as I said, it must be viewed through the lens
of society as a whole. We, the Opposition, see no ev idence that this licensing Bill will reduce drug- related
crimes and death in Bermuda. We do not believe it will
reduce the suffering of our families who are caught up intentionally or unintentionally in black market trade,
because we believe black market trade will continue.
Ultimately, Mr. Speaker, and forgive me for
repeating what was said last year, but this really is not
a Bill that solves the problems of anyone and it certainly does not solve Bermuda’s very serious and si gnificant problems.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
One of the things that I have grown accustomed to hearing from the public is that there are
many politicians who do not listen. And I want to thank
the Minister filling in the breach for the Honourable
and Learned Attorney General, in taking great pain,
great pain and in great detail, explaining how the
Government came to take the position it did. And I
think that when we look at the constraints we labour under, many of the things that they would love to see
on their wish list were not achievable to be able to move forward with this.
Now, having said that, I think (and I will speak
to this a little bi t more) this is something that must be
allowed to continue to grow and evolve as the country
grows and evolves and as this regulated marketplace
evolves. But, Mr. Speaker, you know, I am going to speak to a couple of issues when I talk about where
the Opposition has not been. They have been a little
disingenuous. And let me give you an example, Mr.
Speaker.
The Honourable and Learned Member, my
good friend who just took his seat, speaks of why this Bill does not include the stop list, or something on the
stop list. Mr. Speaker, for those who are not aware,
1192 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly and perhaps the Honourable and Learned Member is
unaware, the Bermuda Government does not regulate
the United States stop list. The Bermuda Government
does not inform the United States stop list. The Bermuda Government does not run the United States
stop list. So, if the Honourable and Learned Member
has a solution that can be done with the wave of a
pen by Parliament, I would ask and challenge him to
put a motion down or an amendment that would allow
it to be a part of this Bill, because I would love to see
that.
And I hope that this is something that they
have in their back pocket and they have prepared for,
because if there is a solution that could be done by
this Parliament, then I want to hear it and I would we lcome it and so would many of my constituents who
have laboured under the US stop list.
But Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Minister
took great pain to explain how we came to the answer
we came to. And one of the things I think that is i mportant, and we all learned this in elementary school,
is to show your work. And the Honourable Minister via
the Attorney General’s brief showed our work in terms
of how we got to where we came to. It is not perfect.
Very few [pieces of] legislation presented by either
party are perfect. But I think that we sometimes, for
political expediency or cynicism, make perfection the enemy of the good.
Now, Mr. Speaker, for me there are several
issues that I think we as a Government must remain
vigilant about as we move forward with this. I think,
first, we have to recognise that there are economic
disparities in this country. There are economic dispar ities based on race, and going forward we have to ensure that the economic beneficiaries of this new market and this new potential economic pillar reflect the
diversity and the richness of diversity of Bermuda the
way other industries simply have not. And do not.
Mr. Speaker, second, we must also ensure
that we do all we can to ensure that those who are in
the grey economy currentl y (the economy outside the
law) have a pathway to legitimacy. We know the ana logy is often given about the Kennedys and bootle gging, the Kennedy family in the United States and bootlegging during the Prohibition Era and how they
were able to transition from bootleggers to legitimacy and eventually to the family representing the pres idency. And it is my hope that we will be able to see
some greatness occur in that space as well.
Mr. Speaker, I want to read a quote with your
indulgence from the America’s Cup Economic Report,
and it speaks partly to the first point that I made in
reference to diversity.

The America’s Cup Ec onomic Review stated, and I quote, “Of the businesses
pursuing or planning to pursue an opportunity, 64 per cent were owned by individuals describing themselves
as White, 16 per cent as Black.”
Mr. Speaker, I am not reading that to pick on
the OBA or to pick on the America’s Cup, because it is
reflective of how our economy works. Whites benefit,
Blacks are lucky to get a piece of the pie. And so, Mr.
Speaker, that model . . . you see it in our boardrooms,
you see it across our society. And so, part of the thing
that I think the potential, the exciting potential, of getting this up and running is changing and shaking that
paradigm forever, even if it is just in this one corner of
the economy, making sure that we build a foundation
that will benefit those who have been excluded or
barely made space for previously. That is critical.
Mr. Speaker, if a cannabis regulated market
20 years from now looks like the boardrooms of Bermuda today, looks like the business ownership of Bermuda today, looks like wealth and privilege and
power in Bermuda today, then we have failed. And
that is the standard by which I will view success going
forward in terms of what this looks like. And it is not
because I do not like White people, and O h, no, we
shouldn’t let people make money. It is because in the
words of the founder of the United Bermuda Party, Sir
Henry Tucker, those who have been denied the most
should benefit the most.
Mr. Speaker, I also want to speak to, as I
mentioned earlier, the people in the grey economy.
We need to make sure that issues such as banking for
those who wish to transition is not an obstacle, financing is not an obstacle. And I have many people who
say to me, Well Jamahl, you know, we should not
spoon feed people. We gleefully and enthusiastically
spoon feed billionaires and millionaires all the time for
the benefit of our economy and no one has a problem
with that. Why not have as much enthusiasm and excitement and passion for providing a pathway to ec onomic success for our people as some of us do for
opening up the immigration floodgates for Pathways
to Status? I think it is just th e right thing to do.
Mr. Speaker, today represents change —
imperfect change, but we are imperfect people. I be-lieve that if we listen and we continue to evolve and
tweak as needed, one of the great things about Parliament is that we can come back and change legislation. Based on my discussion with the Attorney General previously and with the Minister acting in her behalf today we have come forward with the best we can
do now to move progress. We have not let perfection
be the enemy of good. But, Mr. Speaker, we not only
must make change today , but this change must res onate and transform throughout our economy going forward in all the days ahead.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have spent some time over the past year just
reading through, li stening to folks and trying to get a
feel for how this legislation is going to work within our
community. And I am going to begin by stating at least
what I would like to see this legislation do if it is going
to do anything, and that is, as stated in the legislation,
either bring some equal economic opportunity to pe ople who maybe have not been able to have it before, or want to grow that economic opportunity, and also the Government’s social responsibility to the people of
Bermuda.
So, Mr. Speaker, when I think about the equal
economic opportunity, I read through this legislation
and as I was reading it, and as I was reflecting on the
people that I have been listening to that have an inter-est in this legislation, it felt like the two might not marry. And t he reason I am saying that, Mr. Speaker, is
that as I was reading through this legislation, I came
up with about 30 different rules and steps and hurdles
that people need to overcome in order to receive a
licence, apply for a licence, and then be able to m aintain it. And given the fact that there are a number of
people within our community who have a genuine passion for cultivating cannabis and for those that do
enjoy it, I believe that it takes talent. From what I u nderstand it is not easy. And so, there i s a desire to
almost demonstrate their art. But this legislation in a
number of ways has the potential to kind of dilute that
passion.
The reason why I am saying that is because
of all of the framework that is around this legislation. And Mr. Speaker, I a m not going to list them all, but
you have to fill out forms, you have to pay money, you have got to wait [a period of] time for responses, you
have got to spend money and protect your property,
you have got to come up with security cameras, you
have got t o buy surveillance equipment. You do not
get to choose the seedlings or the seeds that you
plant because those will be regulated. You have to go
to training programmes. You have to collect data and you have to document that data. You have got to say
how mu ch you have grown, how much you have sold.
You can get inspected. Your property can get inspec ted at any time. You are not allowed to share your crop
and you have to follow all kinds of rules and guidelines. And it goes on and on and on , Mr. Speaker.
I am just curious who this legislation is actually speaking to, because when I take a look at this, this
sounds like someone who already has some pretty
structured business -minded think already, and I really
do not feel like this has much to do with the person
who simply wants to cultivate a crop, come up with a
beautiful harvest and be able to share it with their friends at the cost of, you know, however much 7
grams or less would cost. So I am just curious what or
who the Government is actually speaking to, that they
think that folks are actually going to go through all of
that in order to cultivate and share, whether selling or
otherwise with their friends and intimate customers.
Mr. Speaker, I am a little lost for words b ecause I am just, again, trying to figure out exactly who we are creating this legislative framework or licensing
framework for. And there are a number of people out
there who were of the opinion in February of 2019 that
a licence would be similar to going in . . . yes, maybe
you have to fill out an application form with your name
and certain details, identify yourself and pay your
$250 for the application fee. And if that application fee
was approved that you would pay another $500 and
you would get a licence and you could take that l icence home or wherever it is you were going to create
your crop of cannabis and that would be the end of it.
But that is not the case, Mr. Speaker! Even if
you want a tier 1 total $750 licence there are a number of long- winded, expensive, sometimes complicated, t ime-consuming, distracting hurdles that people
have to go through in order to maintain that licence
and follow the rules, follow the law. Otherwise, you
are going to get in all kinds of trouble! And it looks to
me as though some of that trouble could be quite s evere. So, again, I just am curious exactly who this leg-islation is really designed for.
Mr. Speaker, my other side is the social r esponsibility. And I believe that many of us are very much aware of the medical traumas around the use or misuse of drugs in our young people. So, I am not
going to go down that road. But what I am going to do,
Mr. Speaker, is just highlight the misconception that
some of our young adults in particular have.
And it brings to mind my memories . . . it
stayed in my head for so many years. It was Colonel
Burch, and he was so genuine. He was heartbroken.
He had put out a campaign, a call for firefighters. And he was so excited because all of these young men
and women made application to join the Bermuda Fire
Service and become firefighters. And then, Colonel
Burch had to come back to the House of Assembly in
distress with his head hanging low to say that of the multiples of people who had made application to become firefighters, only a handful (and if I remember
correctly, it wa s like less than six, maybe even less
than four ) were actually qualified for the position. And
it was not because of anything other than the fact that
they had cannabis in their system and they failed the drug test.
Now, the Colonel did not say it was specifica lly cannabis, but we are going to make that general assumption, or guess. And he may have said that it
was cannabis, but the point that I am making, Mr.
Speaker, is that our young people are not aware, and it is our social responsibility to let them know what the
genuine consequences are of having cannabis in their
1194 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly system and being able to perform certain jobs or b eing employed in places where they could be randomly
tested. Because that is demoralising!
If you think on the one hand . . . because they
are not going to understand or read through 60 pages of licensing and commercialised cannabis. All they are
going to hear is the headline that says it is okay for
them to smoke it. But if we do not have a really solid
communication and message to the community that,
you know what, even with decriminalisation— you can
have your 7 grams, you can go off in private and you
can consume your cannabis —be aware of the fact
(which is the part that I believe the One Bermuda All iance was trying to get across before) that if you are going to smoke it may deter you from having particular
jobs that you want to apply for. It may impact your
ability to earn money through a job. It may have impl ications to your mental and physical well -being. It
could be dangerous if you are driving and you are u nder the influence, and these kinds of conversations. Yes, there is a line in there within the legislation that
may say, “ Oh yeah, by the way, we will do a little bit of
education over here,” but this is a real social respo nsibility!
And especially, Mr. Speaker, if we are looking
at the fact that we are now going to have children who
will be born into an environment where their parents may have candies in the cupboard that have cannabis
within them, that their parents may be more open t o
social environments where there is cannabis being
consumed. So the child is not going to understand
where to draw the line between what the child can do
and what it cannot do. And that kind of education needs to take place, and we need to be able to put
some investment into the education of our young people.
So, it is not even so much about, you know,
Yes, absolutely when you are 21 you can make a decision about whether you are going to consume it , in
much the same way as we might look at some of the
other drugs that have since been legalised, such as
alcohol and tobacco and the like, nicotine. But what I
am saying is that if a child is being born and raised in an environment where it is openly accepted, they
have to know the difference. And they have to k now
the consequences, because it is very different for a
young person to be exposed and for an adult to be
exposed.
Mr. Speaker, I have a couple of questions that
are for the Minister that are just general and one of
them is going back to the actual licensing. I am asking
this in the general debate because I just absolutely could not really find a place for it within a question that
I could ask in Committee. And that [question] is that I
am wondering about sort of the insurance of all of this,
because we d efinitely have had the conversations
about the fact that there will continue to be a black
market. There will be people that will not see the
sense of getting involved in this licensing, regulated
environment, and they will continue to find their supply
of cannabis. They will continue to supply it to their
market and they will continue to earn money from it,
whether we are doing this or not. And so, there could
be a situation where there are lines that are crossed
as far as crops are concerned. We have alr eady had
situations with night farming, so I would imagine some
night farming could exist in this space, too. We also
have the threat of severe weather, hurricanes. There could be fire. There could be a number of things that
could happen within this indust ry.
And yes, maybe this is . . . and I might be answering this myself as I say it. Maybe this is som ething that is in the Regulations, but who is going to insure the products that are and the equipment is b eing created in this space? Because insurance cov erage, I would imagine, is going to be similar to the
banking. Which is my next question.
Where are these folks who are involved in the
industry going to take their money? Because certainly
this Island is so small that there is no way that an ybody is going to be able to have any banking transaction without it being very clear that this is coming from
a business where many banks have little to no appetite in receiving the funds from. So, if the Minister
might be able to give some information on whether
over the past year we have been able to figure out
how to bank the money that would come in from the
proceeds, whether it is within the legal framework,
basically, or not at this stage.
And my final question around these sorts of
nuts and bolts of it, Mr. Speaker, is there is a line in this legislation that speaks to the Authority’s remaining
revenues being deposited into the Consolidated Fund.
This led me again to wonder if that is going to create any risk for the Government or the Ministry of F inance. If there is identification that there may be funds
within the Government coffers, which the banks have
little to no appetite for, how would we manage any
threats around the Consolidated Fund and the compliance of the Bermuda Government with this industry
becomi ng one of which revenue is generated and deposited into our Consolidated Fund?
Mr. Speaker, I am going to end. I am not a
lawyer. I do not even want to go there, but the Minister
did ask about a solution. I do not quite know how it all
works, but it seem s to me that the solution might be to
take page 28 which lays out how the Misuse of Drugs Act [1972] will simply delete all of the terminology of cannabis as a controlled drug. So, I do not understand
why we could not have done away with all that we are
talking about today and simply have made an
amendment to the Misuse of Drugs Act and deleted
the words “cannabis” “cannabinoids” “ cannabis and
cannabis resin” , whatever, and be done with it. Then
the Government could have created a framework for the developm ent of business for cannabis products as
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1195

Bermuda House of Assembly a going business and then people would create their
businesses and they could use this framework because it is not half -bad, Mr. Speaker. And then they
would simply pay their taxes just like any other bus iness. I do not see what the problem would be.
Now, there is one question that I have and
that is around the offensives within this legislation. So,
there was a bit of a piece about the US stop list and
this legislation does not do anything to stop that. So,
the Mini ster might be able to clarify [this] for me. Let’s
say a person is caught with more than 7 grams, ma ybe they have got the 20 grams and it is considered to
be that this person was trying to supply, that they
were trying to sell cannabis. Under the Misuse of
Drugs Act they would get in trouble right now. They
would get fined. They would go to court. And if the
United States Consulate sees this they could put them
on the stop list or something to that effect.
In this Cannabis Licensing Act there are really, really strict penalties for the offence that begins
with if you don’t have a licence —period —then you are
creating an offence and you will be in lots of trouble.
My question is, Would that offence be that a person
does not have a licence? Or would that offence be
that they were trying to supply cannabis? Can that be
clarified? Because that makes a big difference; right?
If on paper a person gets caught with a big
bag of weed and they are trying to sell it and they get busted and they get charged with not hav ing a l icence, they are still going to get prison time, they are
still going to have a huge fine, but at least the crime is
that they were unlicensed to [do] whatever. And I am
asking the Minister if he might be able to tell me what exactly the offence wou ld be called and whether it is a
title that now will keep people off the stop list because
it is some generic offence, or whether it still would
have the drug- related supply piece in there which
would keep the person on the stop list.
So, Mr. Speaker, I am going to end. I believe
that if the Government is unable to make this work . . .
and passing this legislation is the easy part. And that
has taken a year. Passing this legislation is the easy
part. This is an emotional piece. You are tapping into
people’ s passions. And if they feel that you have betrayed them, it is going to be nasty. What is that . . .
measure two, three times before you cut? You def initely want to make sure of that in this case. Because
whether this legislation is unintentionally misleading a
market of people who just want to go on about their
business, that mean no harm, and this betrays them,
we have got an issue, Mr. Speaker.
And worse yet, and I am going to go so far [to
say], Mr. Speaker, if this piece of legislation is going to
be used as an emotional carrot to get people riled up
thinking that the United Kingdom is against them, and
just by reference to the term “cannabis” people are going to get emotional and riled up, if this Government
is going to use people who are just trying to live their
lives and get them emotional and use them for som e-thing else, we are in really big trouble. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.

Deputy Speaker, you have the floor.

Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Mr. Speaker, the last
time this Bill was brought to the House I did not support it, and I do not support it no w. And the reason
that I gave then is the reason that I am still with, and it really does not matter too much to me what adults do in the privacy of their confines. But my problem will
always be, How do we protect our children? That is
always going to be a pet peeve of mine because if we
cannot protect them, then I will always have a problem.
The argument might be, Well, we can’t protect
them against alcohol. And yes, that’s probably true.
But why add one more to this? Mr. Speaker, now I support the decrim inalisation of weed because it
would seem . . . no, it wouldn’t seem, it is. It is a fact
that there is only one segment of the population that is always, 98 per cent of the time, targeted. That is not a
racist statement; it is a fact.
But, Mr. Speaker, I have some questions
here. Now, in the Bill if a policeman can come [to you], if you have more than 7 grams of weed, or cannabis,
or whatever you want to call it, the policeman can take
it. My question is, even though they are allowed to
have 7 grams, if t hey had 20 grams does the polic emen take 13 grams from that person and say, You
can keep 7 [grams] (because 7 grams is legal )? That
needs to be cleared up.
The other issue is about employees and pr ospective employees. There are some requirements in
certain industries that you take a drug test whilst a pplying for a job. And if you fail the drug test most times
you will not be hired. Once you put this Act that goes
into place, that requirement, that stipulation, must come out of the application form for all j obs. Because
if we are saying that one can have 7 grams, it means
that Joe Blow can have a smoke before he leaves
home, wherever he is going, and obviously it stays in
his system for “X” number of days or weeks, or whatever you want to call it. Then you really can’t penalise him because it is legal to have the 7 grams. I need
that to be cleared up, Mr. Speaker.
Now, Mr. Speaker, this concerns me because
not many years ago, when I was much younger, I had some friends that when they got paid, they would take
out their drug money first before they even took mon-ey home to their momma. And that is always going to
be a concern of mine. I do not have to say much on
1196 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly that because my party knows, the Government knows
that I have been against this from the start for the reasons that I stipulated. How do we protect our children?
And that is where I will always be.
And if they can assure me a way how they
can do that, then my stance can probably change. But until such time, I am not there.
Again, let me repeat. I suppor t the decriminalisation of weed. And I will repeat, because most times it is only affects in a negative way one segment of our
community. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for those few words.

We see you, yes.
Hon. Tinee Fur bert: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to have the opportunity to speak to this
legislation. Yes, it has been here before and so like
another Member has mentioned, there may not be
anything new to this legislation, but what I want to take the opportunity to do is to stress the importance
of safeguarding our children.
Again, when reflecting and reading through
this Bill, Mr. Speaker, I do believe the intention of that
which it is supposed to do in regard to regulation of
cannabis that it is a well -written Bill. And it does cover
many bases. And actually, as I was going through many questions that still pop up in my mind were a nswered. But I do not want to discount the fact that we
still have a responsibility to safeguard our children.
The National Drug Commission puts out a lot
of statistics in regard to substance abuse in Bermuda. And what we do know is that when . . . one of the
studies that they released, Mr. Speaker, was that with
the use of marijuana at a very young age, and I will
just use what w e have in this Bill, under the age of 21,
drug use under that age . . . if marijuana is used it
tends to be a drug of choice that people will use for
their lifetime. I am not saying everybody, because some people may experiment and stuff, but the drug
of choice of being marijuana is when someone uses it
[while they are] young [then] that is the drug that
someone will continue to use for a lifetime.
So I think with this legislation, you know,
questions going back and forth in regard to what is the age in which we should be safeguarding children, we chose to go with a very conservative route at the age
of 21. And we have spoken about this before in regard
to what marijuana can do to a child’s brain under the
age of 21. And so we still have an obligation, Mr.
Speaker. Even with this regulation of marijuana, we still have an obligation to make sure that our children
are safe. It does concern me that with the normalis ation . . . and it is already normalised whether it is regulated or not because talking to young people, Mr.
Speaker, I have asked them, How accessible is it to
get marijuana? And they say, If we want to use it, we
will use it. And that is just how accessible it is in Bermuda right now with this regulation or without it.
So as adults, Bermuda, we hav e a huge, huge
job to do in protecting our children. Any government,
any adult, any parent, any guardian —we have a huge
job to do in protecting our children [from] any substance.
With this legislation, Mr. Speaker, and the
regulations around it, we now as a community have
something to go by to hold our Government to account. There are many things within this Bill, Mr. Speaker, that have positive things in it in regard to the
use of drugs. And I can think of the Minister’s ability to
apply how they are goi ng to spend the proceeds from
this. And one of the areas of concern in our community is mental health. So the Minister can choose to use
whatever proceeds from this to strengthen our sub-stance abuse programmes or to strengthen treatment
around mental healt h.
The other thing I would like to speak to, Mr.
Speaker, is making sure that our children, again, are
protected. And I believe there is a piece in the legisl ation . . . I know there is a piece in the legislation that
speaks to having facilities which wi ll sell cannabis
[shall] be 1,000 feet [sic] from I believe it is schools
and churches. And while we will not be able to saf eguard our children totally, I am sure . . . we have so
many churches and schools in our country that it would be difficult for retail to be throughout our Island
[if] those protections are in place. But like I said before, the access for substances right now, in regard to
our children, is there already. Sorry, I said 1,000 feet, I
meant 100 feet, Mr. Speaker. It is not 1,000 feet; it is
100 feet.
There is also a hefty find, Mr. Speaker, in r egard to the sale of cannabis to anyone who is under
the age of 21. And I want the public to be reminded of
what that fine is, and it is $10,000. So when we talk
about how we all can get in troubl e, that is a hefty fine
to have to pay if you are caught selling marijuana or
cannabis to someone who is under the age of 21. And
this is what that regulation structure does. It provides
some protection for our children who are under the
age in our communi ty.
I raised my concerns with my colleagues in
regard to this legislation and possibly moving toward targeting younger persons, because we will still have
an area of marijuana sale that is not regulated. It
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1197

Bermuda House of Assembly would possibly be moved to a younger demographi c
and so that is concerning to me. But I believe that this
legislation does have sufficient safeguards in it for the
protection of our children. We are not going to be able
to protect everything, Mr. Speaker, but it does have sufficient protections in ther e.
And most of all, Mr. Speaker, the protections
will actually not just come from this legislation. It will come from us as adults in making sure that we are
protecting our children from any substance in any particular . . . in this case it would be cannabis. So I just
wanted to state . . . I wanted to speak to that, Mr.
Speaker. It is all of our responsibility in making sure
that we are safeguarding children [from] any substance.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister of Education.

Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Deputy
[Premier] for chairing thi s in the absence of the Attorney General.
Mr. Speaker, I was moved to speak [to] some
of the words that I did hear coming from this. We have
in front of us a Bill that is going to put a regime in place to regulate the sale of cannabis. When talking
about cannabis, depending on where you sit, it can be
an emotive topic for a couple of reasons. I do take into
account what my very good friend from down there in
constituency 5, Brother [MP] Burgess, had to say
about this. It was actually [the Honourable Derric k
Burgess] who spoke that made me want to get on and actually speak to this Bill today.
I do appreciate the words of Minister Furbert
because we do . . . we do and I take heart to that. We
have to be responsible for our children. We have to be responsible for making sure that they make the right
choices. We cannot . . . all we can do is teach them
the way they should go and put them out into the
world and hope that they follow those rules and the
things that we give them to make their lives much
more impac tful for themselves.
I look at this regulation. It is a bold move for
the Government. It is a progressive move for the Gov-ernment. It is something that the rest of the world [is
going] and is moving [toward] and so I . . . I . . . when I
look at it from t hat perspective, you know, we have
just gone through a week of receiving emails from
Members in this House who sit on the other side
about mask -wearing in schools. And the arguments being used is that they are doing it all over the world,
why aren’t we doi ng it here?
We bring a piece of legislation about the reg ulation of the cannabis industry which is being done all
over the world, but for some reason it is not good enough for here. We hear all sorts of nonsensical r ationale. That is the only way I can [s ay] it. And it
makes me wonder, and I will use the term our learned friend uses quite often when he is here debating, the
OBA Member who did go first, Mr. Scott Pearman,
who said Why doth protest too much? And the types
of protestations that we hear.
We c an go back to the last debate and a
Member from the other side who does not sit in the
other House any more had a statement that went
along the lines, I don’t know any drug dealer who
could afford a licence. We now hear MP Jackson, sa ying almost the same l ine, I don’t know anyone who will
be able to do this. I don’t know anyone who has the
wherewithal . . . and you know essentially along those
lines. I am paraphrasing what she said, but why is it
that the One Bermuda Alliance keeps referring to per-sons . . . and I will leave it up to them for them to actually talk about who they are talking about who does
not have the ability to run a business in Bermuda—a
cottage industry business like manufacturing and di stributing cannabis legally. Why is that an issue?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Minister might be unintentionally misleading the House. I am not saying it [as] whether they
have an ability to run a business, but the desire to
want to get into running a business. That some folks
simple want to manage and produce their craft and be
able to have a simple exchange of goods for funds, or
however they wish to do it. But they are not interested
in the bureaucracy of government.

Thank you.
Continue, Minister.
Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain: Thank you. Thank you for
that interjection.
I am glad you clarified that, because what I
did say about the former Member is correct.
We can also go back to a very . . . and we are
still . . . personally I am still trying to figure out what
the meaning of that was. There was an interview that
MP Dunkley did a few years ago when the Progressive Labour Party was in Opposition and brought the
Bill to decriminalise. And he curiously said, What
would decriminalising that amount do to the market?
1198 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly And to this day I am still trying to figure out what the
“market” is that is being referred to.
But I just want the Bermuda public to understand that this is an entrepreneurial opportunity, one
that will be supported by the Government to help those persons who might not have the wherewithal or
may not have all the business acumen to get into this
market. If you read this Bill it also talks about creating
opportunities for persons who may have been disadvantaged by unfair cannabis laws in the past. We do
not all have to be rocket scientists to figure out who that particular segment of society might . . . not might,
but is. So, this is an opportunity for som eone out there
who might be into illegal distribution to become legit imate. Why wouldn’t we want that?
We also hear arguments about the stop list.
Why do we keep talking about the stop list when we know that this is the sole remit of the American Go vernment? The One Bermuda Alliance was a Gover nment from 2012 to 2017. I do not recall there being any movement on the stop list at that point. But all of a sudden now it is back to this level of importance. But
we do know that it was this Government that brought
in decriminalisation of 7 [grams] of marijuana. So the
fact that someone may happen to have a spliff on
them, gets caught, it has to go through court, and
somehow ends up on that stop list, [now] that will not happen. Let us hang our hat at least on that . And say,
You know something? Job well done. Job well done,
guys. People will not be penalised for small, trivial
amounts of cannabis.
But getting back to the Bill. The Bill is solid. It
has the potential to create employment. It has the potential to create an industry that is currently illegal and
underground. It has the ability to improve what we
currently have in Bermuda. Yes, there are going to be
issues as we move on. Yes, there are going to be
things that need to be worked out, just like we have
with anything that is new. We cannot run and hide and
not want to progress into the unknown because we are afraid— afraid of change, afraid of things being
different, afraid of not being in control of an industry.
We cannot use those as excuses to hold the Ber mudian public back anymore.
Those days died when the UBP died. And
they were only resurrected briefly between 2012 and 2017. But they will never resurrect themselves again.
Those ways of thinking are gone. Get used to it. Get
on board and let’s move Bermuda forward and stop
trying to keep us in these archaic ways.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MP Richardso n? Mr. Anthony Richardson: Yes. Good evening, Mr.
Speaker, and to my colleagues and also those in the
listening audience.
My comments are going to be brief I think, as
normal, and more so speak to the need or the en-couragement for both parents and those y ounger persons to exercise a degree of caution.
What I am mindful of is the legislation giving
an unintended sense that using marijuana is now
something that is going to be very, very easy to do
because there will still be certain consequences.
But I wil l say at the start that the beauty of being on the Government team and going through caucus and listening to Members in the constituencies,
and others, is that we are able to actually share ideas.
And the one thing that I am comforted with is that the
Minister and others have ensured that there are cer-tain guidelines in place, or guardrails, if you will, to
make sure that it is not an easy opportunity now for
persons to go ahead and get involved in drugs.
Now what am I talking about? On example is
as persons spoke about earlier. The idea that the usage age was not going to be 18, which many persons
thought of because normally at 18 you can go into the
Regiment and do other legal things. But the guardrail I
was referring to, one of the guardrails, is that th e age
will be moved up to 21. And again, as I think Minister Furbert spoke to earlier, one of the rationales is to do with actual brain function and mental development in
that the thought was that at the younger age of 18, the
brain is still not yet fully developed. And so the caution
or the action of using the age of 21 will certainly mit igate against that.
On a more broad level, one of my comments,
if not concerns, is whether or not we fully accept that
the use of marijuana is actually a cultural realit y for
Bermudians. For good or for bad, many persons do believe that the use of alcohol is actually a part of our
culture and therefore our response and reaction and acceptance of that is very different than if it was not
perceived as being part of our cult ure. And so I do
know of course that there are some persons that I
know, some of my friends actually, who are what I
want to term lifelong users of marijuana. And they do
it and in some cases, just in their minds, it is for relaxation. And so I am happy I suppose that we have gotten to a stage where there are some levels of usage
whereby you are not deemed to be contravening the
law, because some of them really use it for relaxation
purposes. It does not cause them to commit crimes or
otherwise, and it woul d be a shame if what they deem
to be relaxation results in them having a criminal conviction.
And on that line, one of the major impacts on
Black persons more disproportionately is the whole idea of the stop list. MP Jackson spoke about that a
little bit e arlier. And as far as I am aware, we do not
know exactly what informs the stop list because there
have been occasions whereby persons have been to
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1199

Bermuda House of Assembly court, it has not been reported in the press, but yet
they still end up on the stop list. And there are some
other cases whereby persons might not even be co nvicted, they are arrested and then there will be a court case, and they are found not guilty but still end up on the stop list. And so I am not aware of anybody that
can speak to us factually in terms of jus t exactly what
transpires in order to get on the stop list.
So, given the actual impact of being on the
stop list, I would again say that they have to be very,
very cautious and also recognise that the US laws are different from the Bermuda laws. And even if we make
this legal it may not result in persons not getting on
the stop list. And so again my theme is for everybody
to exercise caution and understand what the potential impact is going to be through the use of cannabis or
marijuana.
To MP Burgess’s point, again, the concern is
that if you choose to use marijuana and you come to
me to be employed and I have a policy whereby those
persons who are deemed to be using cannabis cannot be hired then you are going to have a challenge because I am not going t o hire you. And I do not know if
a law can be enacted which says that you can no
longer have an antidrug policy in the workplace b ecause absent that we will be introducing some additional challenges.
Part of my learning, again as being part of the
caucus, has been a discussion in terms of, Is it phy siologically true that marijuana is a gateway drug? And
based upon discussions and other research that I
have done I do not know that it is conclusive that mar ijuana is in fact a gateway drug. So is it true that you
start with marijuana and then progress . . . because
some persons of course will use marijuana. And I
think as MP Furbert said, they may use that for life
and just stay with marijuana. And so in that context it
is not consistent that using marijuana i s in fact a
gateway drug.
The last point I will make is actually going
back to what a former speaker talked about, what I
want to call a “red herring.” And that is, Has the PLP
chosen this route for marijuana in order to pick a fight
with the UK? I think t hat . . . no I won’t say that. To
make the comment that the PLP will pick this as a route to pick a fight with the UK is really beyond the pale, as they would say. I want to say it is ridiculous; I
won’t go that far.
Let’s not be unrealistic. The Government does
put together a platform and then . . . as the Premier
always reinforces, the goal is to ensure that we
achieve what is in the platform because that is what the election was won on and that is the promise to the
people and we work toward . . . and s o that would be
the reason why we are pursuing this as opposed to
any intention to cause a fight with the UK Gover nment.
My final comment will be that the move to decriminalise marijuana is definitely something that I support. As I said earlier, there are persons who
would use marijuana purely for their own recreational purposes and it does not cause them in any way to be
antisocial or otherwise. And it would be very . . . well,
it has been in the past, certainly, very concerning
whereby people may have sm all amounts of marijuana, get caught and then get convicted and their lives
are impacted almost irreversibly, such that we have
persons who might be age 50 or older who still cannot
travel because they were caught with very, very minor
amounts of marijuana at a young age.
So, again, I will end where I started which is to
say that I understand that there are certain guidelines
and guardrails included to minimise the impact on
younger people. But I would still offer that everybody
needs to be cautious if the y start to think that now it is
going to be easier to use marijuana because the potential impacts might be significant and life- lasting.
So with those comments, Mr. Speaker, I will
say thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I believe what I would like to do . . . so much
has already been said in the first debate. And many of
these issues probably do not need to be rehashed
considering the fact that this Bill has not changed in
any way, shape or form. There are some highlights that I believe I would like to take a look at.
I wanted to correct the former Member, the
Minister of Education, when he spoke that the OBA did not do anything (or something to that effect), about
the decriminalisation of cannabis. That is not true. If
he recalls, the Bill was brought to t he House. It was
passed in the House. It did not ascend to the Senate.
In between going to the Senate, an election was
called and so of course—

Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Point of order. We will do your point of
order.

POINT OF ORDER
[Misleading]

1200 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I do appreciate what the Honourable Member is saying but I
think that he is misleading the House. What I did say
was that I did not believe the One Bermuda Alliance
did anythin g about the American stop list. I did not say
anything else. All I said was the stop list.

As a matter of clarification,
let’s just say that it was brought to the House. We will
check the Hansard just to ensure what he did say. But
the [decriminalisation] of marijuana was brought to
this House in 2017 by the One Bermuda Alliance.
This Bill, Mr. Speaker, is quite extensive.
Quite frankly, a lot of work has gone into this Bill. I do
not think there is anyone who can really debate the
work that has gone into putting this Bill together. It is quite extensive. If you were to put another product to
this, I don’t know, flowers, or sugar, for that matter, there would be a resounding by everyone, Let’s push
this thr ough, because the actual Bill itself is quite extensive. Albeit there are one or two areas that we
thought would have been looked into within the last
year because it was brought up and suggestions were
brought up last year. And you have heard some of
those already spoken to.
But the fact that it is cannabis, which conti nues to be a hotly debated topic, and our people are, despite the fact that the substantive Minister has said
that this particular product, cannabis, is widely used
amongst the Island not o nly is it, to her point, widely
used, it is also widely debated as well as to whether or
not it should be legalised.
I do believe that in looking at the stakeholders
as we have done, and taking a second round in trying
to understand better where we need to be positioned,
I would like to bring to the House by [way of] one of
the stakeholders who is in the field of rehabilitation
two concerns that they have with cannabis in this le gislation.
One of those concerns is this, Mr. Speaker, as
I read it. It will s end a message to our already struggling addictive youth population that smoking weed is a norm in society and should be embraced. We are on
the precipice with this attitude for many young, uneducated and unskilled youth as we speak. Many have
found it diff icult to hold a job due to their weed addi ction.
And then the more pressing one, I think, the
second one is, We have no strong track record for
managing the sale of alcohol to minors. We expect the
problems to increase with greater access to cannabis.
So the challenge that we have is . . . that we
don’t have [whether] it is OBA [or] PLP is that we do not have a good track record already of managing or being able to curtail the illicit use of drugs, including
cannabis, not even to the fact of alcohol that should
not be consumed by those under a certain age. And so we are having challenges dealing with the social
ills of this. We know that many of these NGOs are not
being funded and the likes to help the situation in any
demonstrable way. We need to find a w ay to deal with
the current issue that we have, and that there are
many out there who are already afflicted with the ills of
the early use of marijuana, cannabis, and we need to
address it now.
Now, I recognise that in the Bill, I believe it is
on page 9 where the Minister says that the Minister
will be addressing the issues of earmarking monies
toward helping and assisting with rehab and these
kinds of things. But it draws me to what the Honour able substantive Minister said last year. Again, and I
was loo king at the Hansard, she said:
3“It is undeni able that cannabis use is part of Bermuda’s culture,
despite it being unlawful to trade, share or even to
use. Cannabis use is common at social and football
matches and, certainly, at Cup Match and other large
public events. Essentially, unlawful use happens in
plain sight for police officers who are unable to effectively enforce cannabis laws at such events.”
Now my concern is, Okay. This is already
happening. We are already there where it is in plain
sight. W e can go to these social events and we are
policing it now. I have no idea from this Bill as to how
we are going to be able to police it going forward.
There is just no means to be able to do that.
And then the Minister also speaks to the fact
that the industry is worth about $6 million. Well, let’s
think about this. Okay, it is worth $6 million. Any prac-tical person is going to look at that and say, Well, yes.
And there are going to be people who are going to
legitimately get involved in the cannabis industry. But
there certainly is going to still be many who will be
buying, who will be selling, who will be importing unlawfully into the Island. Out of that $6 million is it going
to be a million dollars’ worth that is going to be in the
black market, [or] $2 million dollars? We actually do
not know but it could be substantial.
So what are we doing? Really, if we cannot
police Cup Match to stop it from happening, what are we doing? Because people are still going to get ar-rested. If this legislation is going t o put something in
place that is going to regulate it and allow us to be able to afford to arrest people, what is going to hap-pen at Cup Match then? Are we going to arrest people
at Cup Match? I hardly think so. Not going to happen.
Because it is already a norm. So, if we do arrest, essentially what we are doing is putting people on the stop list.
So the measures that are in this Bill that allow
for all of this regulation to take place still at the end of
the day when you go through the regulation you still
can be arrested and put on the stop list. So I am still
trying to understand throughout this Bill how are we

3 Official Hansard Report, 19 February 2021, page
414
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1201

Bermuda House of Assembly going to balance off the cost of dealing with our social
issues —which we are not addressing now . . . we are
going to put bureaucracy in place, and this bureaucr acy is essentially going to cost. This is more expense
for the Government to put in place. How are we going to manage this? And what are the police saying about
being able to manage this new Bill that is going to be
put in place?
And all of these new regulations and supposedly all of these people who are going to take it up
and quite frankly become legitimate importers . . . I
don’t think it is going to happen in practicality, because we are already not policing it. And putting bureaucracy i n place, heads that are going to sit around
a table and try and figure out what they are going to
do about it, it is not going to happen.
The revenue right now is only $6 million. And
what Government gains from whatever tax there is
going to be, because w e still don’t know what kind of
tax or what percentage it is going to be or if it is going
to be a fixed amount or whatever the case may be, we are still not sure exactly what we are going to gain
from this $6 million. I would dare say, looking at the
numbers the bureaucracy that we are creating is going to cost more than what the revenues are going to
be from establishing this business. And these are just
some of the practical looks of this here. I am not argu-ing the fact that we want to open this up.
I heard it mentioned that we want to allow for
people who have been disadvantaged in the past and
we want to educate them and we want to teach them
how to grow cannabis and do all of these things here,
all noble in their approach, because the Bill is a noble Bill in its approach. But in practical application I am
not sure it is going to be the end- all that it is touting to
be. Or that the people we are saying are going to
benefit from this actually will benefit from this.
I said it once before and I will say i t again. I
have not seen a business model, not many that have
come before the table with the number of people that
we have in Bermuda that substantiates a new industry
like this here. I just don’t see it. Is it creating direct
investment from abroad into t he country? I am not
sure that it actually is. And that has not been substantiated at all through this Bill or in the covered introduction to this Bill that this is going to drive money into the country that is foreign direct investment into the cou ntry.
We do not have enough people to exchange
Bermuda dollars now to support new business, or to
support new industry. Because all we are doing is taking from one and giving to the other. There are not enough numbers here. So how is this Bill in any way
going t o affect or shape the way that we get foreign
direct investment into this country that will keep this
industry alive? Because the only thing that is going to keep it alive is money coming in. The Bermuda dollars
that we are spending amongst ourselves is in no way
near enough. It will not happen. And it will not support this new industry that we are looking to get people
into. It is just not going to do it.
And one of the major expenses to this here,
obviously, is going to be how it is grown, whether it is
outside or if it is indoors, that is going to be a demon-strable amount of cost in getting the right lighting and
the likes. There are so many people who have been
looking at this who thought it was a good idea. But
now that they are looking at it and they are looking at
the effects abroad and what is happening, this is g oing to be a real challenge.
So the Government is going to have to be toeby-toe, day -by-day, minute -by-minute monitoring this
so that it can be a success. But based on where we are right no w, the model financially does not work.
Now, if this is a Bill to socially empower pe ople, which is what we are hearing, well, ok, fine. I get that part of that. But people are still not going to come
off of the proverbial stop list and we are recognising
that it is beyond us. This Bill will create more people to get on the stop list, quite frankly, because of all of the
bureaucracy.
So decriminalising it . . . and I have been vacillating back and forth as to where we go with this
thing. At the end of the day, as my former colleague
said, on page 28 the answer is right there. Cannabis
is no longer a controlled drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1972. And if we put that to the test, then I think that we will allow private industry to take its
course. Government will still get its fees, just like it
does from cigarettes (which used to be banned) and
alcohol (which used to be banned). And now, if we take the same concept, because it is already before
us, if you just take the provisions there in the Act of
1972 then we can make it. Take it off of the Misuse
Act and let private industry do what it does best.
Those who want to get involved, get involved. Those
who can make it happen, let them make it happen.
But putting bureaucracy around this thing is not sol ving the matter at all.
It is just creating more complications to an i ndustry that is, quite frankly, very complicated even now in the black market because it is coming in. And
right now with the criminalisation . . . Listen, you can
have 7 grams on you. No one is going to touch you.
But the person who is importing it can get locked up. It is hypocrisy. At the end of the day that is hypocrisy.
So we just need to simply just hold to this under the
Misuse of Drugs Act. Take it off the list and then we
allow busin ess to thrive. And if that is the intent of tr ying to push this industry then to me that seems the
easier more plausible route to take, rather than creating more expense.
The Government has expense now that it
cannot afford. So we simply need to look at th at and
make sure that in practical . . . although the Bill makes
sense in all of its clauses, this is not going to work. I
think that is the concern that we have, many of us on
1202 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly this side, and some on the PLP side as well. There
are major, major concerns wi th this here.
If we cannot come up with ways to be able to
manage our young people now and to educate them
. . . I mean, we said that we were going to put sugar
tax in place and the proceeds of that was going to go
toward promoting health. That has not happened.
What makes the Government believe that the public is
going to believe in the fact that we are going to earmark money for the safety and security of our people
when it is not happening now from the proceeds of this here?
And so these are the things that I am hoping
that this Government will address and give some an-swers to, because it gets complicated. And it gets a bit difficult. There has been over many, many decades
. . . and I have said this before. There was talk about
the fact that there were o thers not like . . . or the persuasion of myself and most of the PLP (99 per cent of
PLP MPs) that profited from the sale of cannabis —or
drugs, period, quite frankly. But let’s just be honest
here. There are many Blacks who profited from the
sale of cannab is. Many of us who are of the Black
persuasion have profited, have gained, have bought
houses and bought cars from the proceeds of selling
cannabis, importing it and selling it. And to this date
we have nothing demonstrable other than non- profit
organisati ons who are trying to fix the social ills that
have come from that. So, yes, we want to empower Blacks, but we need to take responsibility as a people
and recognise that we have sometimes been our
worst enemy.
And I would say, Mr. Speaker, that out of the
36 of us in the House of Assembly, I am sure that at least one or two of us are users. And we know it is
illegal. Statistics will say that. The Statistics will pro bably say that maybe some of us, one or two of us,
might have even been importers of it, sell ing it, out of
the 36. So let’s just be frank here about what it is that we exactly are trying to do and let’s be transparent.
So if it is about empowering Blacks, say how it
is going to empower Blacks. Say how . . . and then
speak to how we are disadvant aging other people
who might be White in the middle class who want to
do something or get into this field. I mean if we are
going to go after reparations, then maybe there is an-other route of doing it. Of everybody in Bermuda, we
should be putting legislat ion in place that allows for all
to thrive in this Island.
And if we need to go back and look at repar ations from whoever it is because of some of the ills of
the past, I don’t believe that this particular Bill is the brunt to be taking forward. Because that is not what
we should be doing here when we bring legislation to
the House.
Are we interested to hear . . . unfortunately
the substantive Minister is not in his seat. I will be i nterested to hear a little more about how we are going
to empower Blacks t hrough this particular Bill. And I am not talking about people who think they are Black,
but they are not Black; I am talking about Black people.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Oh, Opposition Leader.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
A lot has been stated this afternoon about the
direction of the cannabi s industry in this country. And
as was said by my colleague . . . let me turn my camera on. Sorry. As was said by my colleague, the infr astructure that they have put in place is interesting, it is
thorough, and we cannot deny the work that has gone into th is piece of legislation.
Mr. Speaker, what I find most interesting, and
my colleague spoke about it, is the amendment to the Misuse of Drugs Act 1972, which is imbedded in the
legislation, removes cannabis as a controlled product.
So if cannabis is remov ed as a controlled drug, and
can be treated like cigarettes or alcohol, then what
was the motivation of all of this legislation we have
here today? Because anybody would be able to operate in a free market. And just as you tax cigarettes and alcohol, you m ay find a way to tax cannabis.
And so it is interesting to see how far they
have gone in relaxing and at the end of the day this
legislation will remove cannabis as a controlled drug
based on what we have in this legislation. So if I want
to smoke some weed at home, I can smoke weed at
home. If I want to go to my friend’s house and smoke weed, I can do that as well because it is no longer a
controlled drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1972.
And so it is quite puzzling, quite frankly.
Now, as we said, th ere is a lot of work to put
in place a framework that will support the cannabis
industry. And, Mr. Speaker, if we are talking about an industry that we are promoting to empower young
Black people, young White people, at what cost are
we developing this industry? Mr. Speaker, I am going
to say what I said last year, we as parliamentarians
are here for the present and the future, and the future
being our young people. I am going on record to align myself with the comments made by my cousin, the
Honourable Der rick Burgess, asking how we are going to protect our children, and Minister Tinee
Furbert’s concern about safeguarding our children.
Mr. Speaker, we are here today to promote
the cannabis industry with a framework, with new leg-islation, with guidelines in farming and cultivation, and
institutionalising the sale. I take the view, Mr. Speaker,
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1203

Bermuda House of Assembly of let’s be very, very honest with ourselves. I reckon
that 90 per cent of the people in our Chambers today
have children. As parents would you prefer your child
to work in a cannabis industry or another profession?
I know, personally, I would not want my
grandson to be working in the cannabis industry. And I am 90 per cent certain that if having a choice no MP
in this House would encourage their children to get
into the cannabis industry. So let’s be honest with
ourselves and Bermuda, why are we promoting this when we would not have it for our own families? And that is the hypocrisy of it all, Mr. Speaker.
Would you want your grandchild or your sons
to say to you at 12 or 13 years old, Poppa (or Daddy ),
I want to have a career in the cannabis industry. What
would you do? Knowing the associated risks, the i mpact that it has on individuals and the impact that it has on our families and the impact that it has on our
homes, would you encourage them to get in that i ndustry? So why are we encouraging it today?
And as I said, we are not just making legisl ation for today; we are making legislation for the future. And if we are making legislation for the future, we are
making l egislation for our children and our grandchi ldren. So this is where the hypocrisy comes in.
I think, if I had to make a choice, I would lean
toward just the removal under the Misuse of Drugs Act that is embedded deeply, deeply, deeply in this legi slation. Because as was said by my colleagues, if I
want to cultivate cannabis in my garden, then there
are at least 20 conditions that are a prerequisite for
me to have a garden that has four plants in it. And is it
worth the hassle? And so we are trying to help the small man. And then if I start a small business [with]
cannabis and get a licence, I think 2 or B, and I want
to sell, then the question becomes how much capital
do I have to get into this business? The licences in
total are around $750.
But in additi on you will either have to buy
property or equipment to grow cannabis. And is a
young person going to get financing from the banks to
enter this new industry that has been authorised by
the Government? Are they going to get financing from the [Bermuda] Economic Development Corporation for
cannabis? These are the people we are trying to support according to the PLP Minister.
And in so supporting, are they going to ensure
that they have access to capital to start up in this
business? Is the [Bermuda] Economi c Development
Corporation going to go the banks and say We would
support Minister Simmons’ child to have a cannabis business in Bermuda. Is the Bermuda Economic D evelopment Corporation prepared to make that repr esentation to our banks, to our lending insti tutions? B ecause the people they perceive and want to help and
want to empower need capital. And where are they going to get capital from to enter an industry that is in
essence shunned upon by most financial institutions in this country? So will the Gover nment provide these
budding entrepreneurs with capital?
So that leads me back to what I said in the
last debate, Mr. Speaker, and that is the issue of
banking. I think my colleague, Ms. Jackson, brought it up. And I think someone else brought it up. Last y ear
the Premier said that they were working on solutions
for a banking perspective. And I hope that he is able
to bring that information to the House today in regard
to the banking element of this budding industry.
I met with a few bankers, and I declare my i nterest, and their position has been clear and con-sistent. Their position is that the correspondent banks
and most of our banks in Bermuda use federally
charted correspondent banks, i.e., their banking charters are issued by the Federal Government. And as
you know, Mr. Speaker, the US Federal Government
still deems cannabis to be illegal in the country even
though state- by-state it may vary. So, as long as we
have that issue unresolved with our correspondent banks that are licensed by the US Federal Gov ernment the three largest banks in this country will pro bably not be able to transact US currency from the cannabis industry.
Now, people may say, Mr. Speaker, What
about Bermuda dollars? So, we have a new industry.
We have employees to pay. And we have s mall far mers who may be trading with a small vendor’s licence
and they want to bank their money. This is . . . I am
not going to say a no- no. What I will say is that this is
going to be an interesting challenge for the banks. Because you know how we Bermudians are, we will bring our Bermuda dollars from our salaries, or from
our earnings from our cannabis business, and put
them into our local banks, be that [Bermuda] Commercial Bank, Bank of Butterfield, HSBC, Clarien, and
so on and so forth, and we deposit Bermuda dollars.
Now that may work . That may work; but the
challenge occurs when our Bermudians or account
holders who earned their money from cannabis purchase US currency, and then there is a bleed from
Bermuda to the US. And that is where the problem
begins. And that is where the licences of our banks
will be compromised, because the moment that this
trader or that employee receives its salary from a cannabis company, be it the cannabis retail store or
the cannabis café house and coverts it to US [doll ars],
they are violating US laws. And so it is more complex
than one could have imagined, and it is my understanding that the three biggest banks have not had
this issue resolved yet. And it is a no- go at this point in
time because of correspondent banks.
They may have used a state bank for the correspondent bank, a state bank that has authorised cannabis industry, like Colorado. And so there are
some dynamics going on. And if the Premier and the
Attorney General are serious about this industry, then they have to find solutions for this industry if it is to
thrive, because you cannot have people working there
1204 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly and not bank their salaries or not realise income from
their investment and not put it in our banks to pay for
[their] mortgage, to pay for the credit cards, and so on
and so forth.
The Premier said last year that he would find
a solution to this. I would like to hear what the Premier
has to say about that solution.
Mr. Speaker, the other interesting issue that I
found quite revealing was the issue of importation and
export of cannabis. In particular, I am talking about
cannabis plants, cannabis derivatives, not necessarily oils but plants in particular. You can export leaves,
you can export dry leaves, you can export seeds. This
would have to go through our Department of [Env ironment] and Natural [Resources], in other words to
our Plant Pathology Lab at the Botanical Gardens under the leadership or guidance of Ms. Terry Lynn
Thompson. And the question becomes, What i nvolvement have they had in this leg islation?
I know, having been the Minister, that when
we export plants we have to issue a Phytosan itary Certificate, I think that is the proper name. And
when we import plants, we have to have certificates and that [Plant Pathology] lab will authorise the entrance of those plants or buds or seeds into this country. And so what is the infrastructure in place to address that issue? Especially if some of the larger pr oducers want to export or import plants, seeds or d erivatives of the plants. So I would like for the Minister
to address that issue, because I take the view that the
Plant Pathology Lab (I think it comes under the Mini ster who is presenting the Bill today), and I think that
needs to be examined and addressed. And it was not addressed in the Minist er’s presentation.
The other issue that bothers me, and it goes
back to small business versus black market versus
commercial market. Now, let’s look at our schools. A
lot has been said about various testing or various . . .
what is the word I am looking f or? Each year they do a
survey of young people and these young people, and
some of the questions pertain to drugs and young
people’s involvement in drugs. And so we know that
the infrastructure that is being placed by this legisl ation applies to adults 21 years old and above. They
are not allowed to sell to anybody below the age of 21. And nobody under the age 21 should be involved in this industry.
But, Mr. Speaker, we know that our young
people participate in the use of cannabis. And so if they cannot get it from this new infrastructure we are
putting in place, where do they go? They go back to
the black market. They go to the black market which is unprotected, it is unregulated and their industry will
continue to thrive. And so we will have two parallel
industries: The black market, and the current instit utionalised market that we are using to support a new
industry in this country.
Mr. Speaker, there are some who say that the
cannabis black market will thrive because they do not have the infrastructure t hat is required under this pr oposed legislation, the cost of operation will be much less, and as a consequence the cost of cannabis will
be far cheaper than the cannabis purchased through
this new institutionalised commercial industry here in this country. And so we do not see the black market
diminishing because of this new infrastructure.
To me, this infrastructure would be for adults,
some professional people in this country, some wor king-class people in this country who want to make
sure that they are on the right side of the law and yet
they can enjoy their pastime of having a joint whene ver they want. And so I am concerned that the black
market will subsume some of the small business people who enter this industry that we are putting together
today because they do not have the capital and the
black market has more capital and so they can draw the small businessman into the black market net.
And we know what happens to black markets,
the associated crime and in some cases loss of lives
because of turf wars and so on and so forth. And that
has not been addressed in this issue. We know that
we have social problems in this country because of
drugs, and I do not see this legislation addressing
some of those social problems.
Mr. Speaker, I know that I am, l ike the rest of
Bermuda, getting very, very tired of the PLP Gover nment looking in the rear -view mirror and blaming the
OBA for what they did and did not do for the four
years they were in power. Mr. Speaker, this PLP Go vernment has been in power for 20- plus years. They
have positioned themselves to run this country, and if
they wanted to bring this cannabis industry forward as
they are today they could have done so long ago. It is
like the gaming industry, long ago, with or without the
regulator. They coul d have delivered. And so just stop
saying the OBA did this; the OBA didn’t do that. We
were four years in —four years.
As our colleague said, we presented some
options in addressing this industry in the four years
that we were there. We went and tried and basically
decriminalised it. As I said publicly, as my party said
publicly, we support the decriminalisation of the use of
less than 7 grams of cannabis, and we support medi cinal marijuana, and that position we do [support] unequivocally.
Mr. Speaker, I t ake the view, and some of my
colleagues in the party and outside of the party take the view, that it is irresponsible to pass economic e mpowerment legislation under the aegis of improving the economy and creating jobs and fostering entr epreneurship when the by -product is increased hospitalisation as has been proved in other countries, i ncreased road accidents as in Bermuda and other countries, increased social and educational achiev ement challenges faced by our students and young people. And it is just irresponsible, Mr. Speaker.
So, with those brief comments . . . Oh, I know.
I have one more thing I would like to address.
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1205

Bermuda House of Assembly The other issue and someone mentioned the
issue of drug testing in the workplace. Again, with the
removal of cannabis under controlled drugs in the
Misuse of Drugs Act 1972, how is this going to impact employees of companies that are known to drug test their employees? Will they be compromised if they
smoke weed under this legislation whereby cannabis
is no longer a controlled drug? How i s the Gover nment going to address that challenge in the wor kplace?
Mr. Speaker, on those comments I think I
have made my contribution. And I will end with the
way I began. We are creating a new industry. We
have put together (and I will just admit) a good infrastructure for this new industry. But would we encourage our children and grandchildren to get into the
cannabis industry when there are so many other c areers that they can embark upon that can be just as lucrative and will not have the risks?
And qu ite frankly the market for cannabis is
not that grand. I mean you have heard the Minister in
his opening remarks say $6.2 to $6.5 million. That is
not a large sum of money for an entire industry. And
so, again, Is this the type of industry that you would
encourage your child or grandchild to [enter]? I would
say 90 per cent of us would not encourage our chi ldren to enter this industry. And so we need not be so
hypocritical that it may not be good enough for our
families but it is good enough for other peopl e’s fam ilies.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Premier.

Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, let me start from the beginning
recognising that this is the second time that this Honourable House will be doing a second reading of the Cannabis Licensing Act, and the only change is that
the last time it went arou nd it was the Cannabis Licensing Act 2021. And this time, of course, Mr.
Speaker, it is the Cannabis Licensing Act 2022.
But I want to pick up where the Shadow Mini ster of Finance and the Opposition Leader left off and ended, because his party has come out and said that
they do not support this Bill. However, his statement
just now said that we are creating a new industry. And
for an Opposition who in his Budget Reply said that the Government must get on with the job of creating
additional economic activit y in this country, if there is
something that can create additional economic activity in this country that is in line with where many jurisdi ctions are going, where many US states, many countries in the European Union, we know many countries
globally [are going], the question is why would we
not?
And it harkens back to . . . I remember the
conversations talked about, Why our [slow] progress
in gaming? And there is a lot of people who say that
we are behind the boat in gaming. And there are
many people who also say that we are behind the
boat on cannabis regulation. And I think that it is i mportant that as leaders of the country we must be
honest with the people of whom we serve. I do not
think that you can say that you stand for economic
growth. I don’t thi nk as a Shadow Attorney General
that you [can] say that you want to support freedom of choice while at the same point in time saying that we do not want you to do this or we don’t want you to
that.
And I think that it is important, Mr. Speaker,
that we recognise what it is that we are speaking
[about]. Because the regulation of cannabis does not in any way, shape or form support or oppose persons’
use. That is for people to make a choice. What we
have to understand and recognise is that people will
make th e choice anyhow. So how do you make it so
that it is less accessible for children, safer and also something that brings a degree of persons out of the shadows to at least be able to be contributing to pensions in this country, to be contributing to social insurance in this country, to be contributing to things that
work?
Now, I have to pick up on this because it is
vital and important. And, Mr. Speaker, I will admit that I have had a few meetings with ministerial colleagues
so I have not been able to tune in to the entirety of the
debate; however, I do have some notes which have been shared by the Deputy Premier who is leading
this debate today. And he is leading this debate today in the place of the Honourable Attorney General. And
her team has done an in credible job over the past
three years on this particular issue, Mr. Speaker, addressing the concerns of which have been raised by
the community, addressing the concerns of which
have been raised by Members of the Legislature and addressing and making sure that we put in place r esponsible legislation that can withstand international
scrutiny.
And I think that it is important because I know
that it is the Opposition’s role to try to poke holes and
call it this and call it that and it this and all the rest. But here is one place where they fall short, Mr. Speaker.
Because it is important to remember, note and understand that one of the principles of this Bill, one of the
principles when it comes to restorative justice in this
country is enshrined in legislati on of this Bill. Because
this Bill, Mr. Speaker, makes it very clear that the
cannabis industry falls under the Human Rights Act,
section 6A. And that means that this is a special pr o1206 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly gramme, Mr. Speaker. And people may ask, What is a
special programme under the Human Rights Act, section 6A? A special programme is that it is designed to
assist a group of persons to receive equal economic opportunity.
So when there is this whole thing about a corporate cannabis and this and all the rest, the Gover nment has st ated on record [its] policy that the first l icences will go to those persons who have been disenfranchised by policies that we know [are] racial in their
effect. That is what economic justice is about. And so it is difficult for me to understand how, if we are talking
about righting past wrongs, if we are talking about
broadening the economic pie, if we are talking about
making sure that we make economic justice a reality in this country, there is opposition to creating a new
industry ensuring that persons who are disadvantaged
have access to this industry enshrined in statues and
making sure that the protections are there for the chi ldren in our society. That is what this thing is doing,
Mr. Speaker. Now, I will accept just like any piece of legislation tha t comes to this House, it is not perfect. It
is difficult when you have a multiple -clause Act that
everything is exactly as you want it.
But here is the truth, Mr. Speaker. The Attorney General is very diligent in her approach. And very diligent when it comes to ensuring that laws are made correctly and advice is done correctly. And the history
of that has been borne out by this Government. Let’s
look. When it came to the legal challenge and the l egal matters with the Lahey case, we saw what ha ppened under the Attorney General’s leadership. When it came to the challenge regarding the Government’s quarantine policy, the Government was victorious because we made good law. When it came to the challenge of the Domestic Partnership Act the Gover nment was victorious because we made good law! And
when it came to the challenge when it came to the
Corporation of Hamilton, the Government was victor ious because we made good law!
This, Mr. Speaker, is good law. Some persons
may like it; some persons may not like it. But here is
what it does, Mr. Speaker. It fulfils our promise to the
electorate. And it was blessed by the electorate because it was inside of our election manifesto, and it
was clear in the direction of which we went. And there was significant consultation f rom the initial stage of
the Bill, the initial draft, [and] other items to make sure
they were added in to ensure that this could be as
broad- based an opportunity as possible.
And so, Mr. Speaker, it saddens me that after
a general economic debate where we said we must
work together to promote, to improve, to grow our
economy, to create additional opportunities, to create
additional revenue, to create additional things, that we
do not have the support of the Opposition.
And it is a very interesting point, Mr. Speaker,
because the Honourable Member from constituency 20 said, and I quote, Passing this legislation has taken
a year. Why is that? Wow!
If the Opposition would have not been obstructionists, we would not have been debating this
legislation again i n this Honourable House. Now, I
accept that it did not pass the other place with oppos ition from the Opposition and also the Governor’s
Senators. I accept that. But I cannot understand why
there are complaints insofar as how long it has taken
to go , while the Opposition was set to obstruct.
So, I will send a message to the Honourable
Leader of the Opposition during this, and I will say that
this matter will go the other place again. And if they
are serious about collaboration, they should draw up
some amendments —if they are serious about collaboration. If philosophically they believe that the laws should stay as they are, that the electorate who is demanding a change in our approach to Cabinet pol icy of this country, that is around the approach that
other c ountries are taking, if they do not support that,
then they should just tell the electorate that we believe
that everything is fine as it is. But you can’t have it both ways. You can’t rail against something that has
been put forward without presenting an alternative.
So we will see when this Bill goes to another
place whether or not the Opposition will actually table amendments, whether or not they are serious or
whether or not they want to obstruct. Because ob-struction, Mr. Speaker, is precisely what the people of
this country do not want. They want us to move forward and to advance on issues.
And as Leader of this Government, Mr.
Speaker, one thing that you know that I hold sacr osanct is our election manifesto. These matters were
placed before the electorate and were blessed by the
electorate. And it is the responsibility and the oblig ation of the Government of Bermuda to execute it.
And Mr. Speaker, I must say that it is highly
unlikely and unusual in Westminster systems of government that Senators or p ersons who are in another
place in the Upper House of the Legislature, will vote
against Government legislation that has been blessed
by the public at a general election. It is almost unheard of.
So, it remains to be seen if the approach is
going to be the same, Mr. Speaker, then the people will see it for what it is. The people will recognise that
there is a party who listens to the electorate. A party
that has tailored their policy so they can pass legal
scrutiny locally, legal scrutiny internationally and can
actually move the dial versus a party that wishes to obstruct additional economic opportunity in this country. So the record will reflect when this is done where
the One Bermuda Alliance stands, Mr. Speaker.
Now, I will say, Mr. Speaker, that I understand
that there have been some questions in regard to
banking. And as the Minister responsible for Finance, and also the Minister responsible for the National Anti -
Money Laundering Committee I can state that this is
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1207

Bermuda House of Assembly certainly a challenging issue. It is a challenging issue
in banking when it comes to FinTech and a lot of di fferent other activities. We know that the Bermuda
Monetary Authority has made some progress in this
area.
We know that the Bermuda Monetary Author ity already has a notice which allows certain lawful
cannabis proceeds and capital from overseas be regulated in Bermuda. That is a start. And we have to
make sure that further work happens with the Berm uda Monetary Authority and also further amendments to the Proceeds of Crime Act which may h appen to
ensure that when this business becomes regulated,
that it is not considered an unlawful activity in regard
to the Proceeds of Crime [Act]. So it will certainly be unlawful if someone is doing it outside of the law, but
if someone is doing it inside of the law then it is not
unlawful activity, Mr. Speaker. And so I think that it is
important that we certainly recognise that.
And this is not something that is unusual because it there have been similar amendments that are
already exist, a perfect example would be in Jersey in
the Channel Islands where they have made those
similar types of changes to their Acts to comply to ensure that there is not the (I would say) inherent opposition to banking due to the fact that these matters are
considered procee ds of crime with the Proceeds of
Crime Act. And so once we move these things into the
legal sphere, under a regulated regime, those changes and processes can happen. Now, it is different in
the United States where they have things on a federal
basis, but w e can recognise that in Canada it is of
course a different situation where from the Federal
Government side they have regulated it.
And so, Mr. Speaker, I have to close on an
overall space that the leadership is incredibly difficult.
And when you as a Government have been chosen to
lead, you must be able to stand for your principles and
deliver on the promises of which you have made to
the electorate, despite the opposition of which you
may face. Yes, Mr. Speaker, this Bill will pass this
Honourable House t oday because it is a Government
Bill that is supported by our caucus, that is supported
by our central committee, and which is part of our
election manifesto. And though it does not have unanimous support, it will pass and it will go to another place. And the question is, what will happen then?
It is my hope that there is an open approach
to this by the Opposition. But it is not my expectation, Mr. Speaker. It is my hope that the person of this
country who may believe that this law isn’t perfect but
recognises the law for what it is —a step forward in the
right direction underneath a very strict international
regime—will accept it for the progress of which it represents, and they will accept the balance that the
Government has intended to strike. Because when I
hear the Shadow Minister talk about, Oh, for those
people who think that this means that you are going to be able to smoke on the street, it doesn’t happen. It
was not supposed to, Mr. Speaker.
Again, this is regulation. It is not, do anything
you want. Which , by the way, the One Bermuda All iance does not support. So I do not even understand
why strawman arguments are raised, Mr. Speaker.
This is a good Bill. It is good law. It has been
well researched. It has been refined. It has been sub-ject to numer ous rounds of consultation, an open consultative process where numerous things were sub-mitted by numerous groups and numerous amendments and numerous changes were made to ensure
that it reflects the uniqueness of the country of which
we are in Bermuda.
But I end here. As leaders who are elected to
carry out a mandate, it is the responsibility of us to be
responsive to the concerns and the desires of the people who vote for us, Mr. Speaker. Change in a pproach to cannabis policy enjoys majority support
acros s this country. And it is incumbent upon this
Government and this Honourable House who repr esent those persons that we execute on their wishes.
That is what we will do today. And it is important that
we carry that forward in all types of items.
This is a sea change. This is different. It is uncomfortable for many. I have had conversations out of
my own family where it is uncomfortable. But we have
to recognise that we have to treat these situations di fferently to ensure that we have better outcomes for
our economy, better outcomes for our healthcare, better outcomes for our children and better outcomes for
the citizens of this country, Mr. Speaker. And that is what this Bill represents as it is a step forward in the
place to make a regulated cannabis regime in Berm uda that can withstand scrutiny.
So, as I close, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank
the Deputy Premier for covering for the Attorney Gen-eral today. As I indicated, the Attorney General is not
able to be here today. But what is vital and important is that the work that has been done is good work and I
look forward to it passing in this Honourable House
today and I look forward to a debate in the other
place. And I would hope that the Opposition would
look to moderate its approach and be on the side of
progress and be on the side of additional economic activity in this country.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Premier.
Are there any further speakers?
Minister.
Hon. Walter H. Roban: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And
I certainly thank [Members] for the fullness of the participation that we have seen on this Bill. Clearly, irr espective of the fact that it is the second reading of a
second reading, Members felt certainly emboldened to speak fully to it again. And that is always good for the
proces s, if not certainly to remind the public of their
1208 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly stances to be consistent with those positions but to
ensure that every Bill that comes to this House, irr espective of what form, has a full and robust treatment.
I will move to answer some of the questions
that I believe appeared during the discussions. The
Honourable Premier did speak to the banking issue
and that continues to be a work in progress. I think we
are all mindful that this is a very delicate and carefully
worked process. We as a jurisdiction, irrespective of
what we are seeking to achieve, want to ensure that we abide by NAMLC and CFATF requirements around banking, around financial services. And we will make
sure that whatever decisions come around the banking piece, which is still being worked on, will achieve
what is needed without damaging our reputation as a jurisdiction.
The Premier did mention some of the details
up to date around that, but that continues to be
worked on. And so once those issues are fully fleshed
out and dealt with around this matter, obviously other
jurisdictions have found solutions for their issues around the banking piece and we will work out ours
that will fit our [situation].
There was quite a bit raised concerning the
issue of our children, Mr. Speaker, and I do not want it
to be minimised or understated that clearly the perception of the vulnerable is very crucial here in what-ever is done. Just as with other controlled substances
that are regulated, the protection of the vulnerable
from being exposed to alcohol abuse or even abuse
by other regulated drugs and medication is very cr ucial in how things are handled. Just as an institution or
organisation that wishes to serve alcohol, a highly regulated industry in our community, there is very rigid
regulation on the sale, distribution and handling of
alcohol. Certainly, that care and attention will have to
be even more paramount within this proposed fram ework.
So there are a number of issues around the
protection of children that were raised and one of the
questions w as will the Cannabis Licensing Act expose
children to cannabis? The illicit market in Bermuda
already unfortunately exposes our children to canna-bis and that is a problem, clearly. And we have to continue to work at that. But the Cannabis Licensing Bill
creates a more effective control in prohibiting the access of cannabis products to children.
And certainly the age limit is 21 for involv ement with a licensed cannabis industry. A young per-son found with cannabis will be automatically diverted
to the appropriate treatment and education process.
But as it is prohibited now for children to have contact with controlled substances, it will continue to be. We
do not promote or lawfully want children to be consuming alcohol or any other controlled substance.
That is in the law, and that will continue with this [Bill].
How are young people and other vulnerable
people going to be protected? The age limit of 21 is set for obtaining a licence to using and consuming of cannabis. And I think we all know that there are c ertain scientific studies that already state that exposing children to cannabis in any way at a young age is
damaging to their development. That is already understood scientifically. So it is clear that we accept that as a conclusion and that pervades thro ugh what
we are trying to do.
And they are not even allowed under the pr oposed licensing to enter a cannabis shop. So people
cannot just walk in with their child in some future possible establishment that might be selling cannabis products, and buy. Children are not supposed to be
exposed to that environment.
Young persons found in possession of cannabis will be diverted to the appropriate programme to deal with that. I think there is an effort, Mr. Speaker
. . . I think one of the philosophies and premis es that
was operated on is that we are trying to remove the
criminalisation of people’s involvement in handling the
cannabis because of the history of that. So the Cannabis Authority will be able to direct a portion of whatever revenue it does propose to [ receive] to dealing
with and supporting the funding of addiction [treatment] and training. Effective public education campaigns will have to be and are a part of the mandate
of the Authority and they will work with other agencies,
whether they be the polic e, the Department of National Drug Control and other non- governmental agencies
to support diverting young people away from addictive substances, and certainly a no- tolerance level of that.
So those are some of the answers that relate to that.
There were some other questions or comments raised, Mr. Speaker, that I would like to make sure that are responded to. I am going to do this in
two parts. One Member had a very strange, odd question and which seemed to assert that people who are
in jobs that put them i n control of health and safety
and the care of people, which would include teachers
and other people, somehow there is a problem that they have to be exposed to perhaps random testing of
their possible use of controlled substances, and how
that is actually a burden and it is a problem or is demoralising. Well, I would think, Mr. Speaker, that we
would want to make sure we would want to know that
those people who are involved with activities, occupa-tions and work that puts them involved with the care
and saf ety and protection of people are not being i nfluenced by substances, whether it be alcohol or cannabis or some of the other drugs that have been mentioned here that we know, opioids, or other things that
pervade or society.
Do you want to go under the sur geon’s knife
when your surgeon has had a smoke of weed? Or had
a drink or sip of alcohol that might have put them over
the limit prior to that operation? Or do you want a bus
driver or a truck driver or somebody driving a truck
with toxic substances like petrol or things that could be flammable driving or operating machinery or operating a vehicle when they may have been under the
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1209

Bermuda House of Assembly influence and there is no way to monitor or like arrest
that if it might happen?
I doubt that anybody in this House would
agree that we should be flexible on that. So the comment about the demoralisation was a little bizarre. I
think people who are in occupations which put our
citizens under their responsibility know their oblig ations. And unfortunately, obviously people are human,
and things do happen. But I think everybody who goes
into those sorts of occupations, Mr. Speaker, know
what the responsibilities are.
There seemed to be some comments, Mr.
Speaker, about if we just delete cannabis from the
Misuse of Drugs Act that this will fix the problem and
creating all the bureaucracy is actually more of a problem than it is worth, and that [deletion] is the real fix to
it all. Well, that is very interesting, Mr. Speaker, because if we look at what we are doing here, this Bill is
about creating a regulatory framework for the cannabis industry, for a proposed cannabis industry to develop a cannabis industry. It is not legalisation of can-nabis and its use outside of a regulated framework in
any way.
So, we could do what the Honourable Members of the Opposition say. But how does that pr ogress anything? Because it does not create the real
framework where that substance is now being totally made legal and can be handled responsibly. If we accept that it should be handled responsibly.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I think it has been widely
referenced that there are a number of countries that have already gone down this road that we are going.
In the Caribbean and in Latin America, Europe and elsewhere, they all have regulated frameworks to
manage thi s substance, this plant substance now that
they have decriminalised it, or they have made it . . .
liberalised its handling in their community. So where
we can look to see what has been done already, ev ery jurisdiction has an Authority.
[We can] go back t o as far as places like the
Netherlands which has a long history of relaxing certain practices around substances, Mr. Speaker. They
have an Authority in their country, as does Uruguay, as does Portugal, as does Jamaica, as does St. Vi ncent, as does Canada. They have Authorities that
manage the handling, the whole process around . . .
now that they have decriminalised the handling of the
substance, they create a legal framework that it can
be managed responsibly in the community, and [manage] its usage.
So that is where we are going. This is not bureaucracy; this is proper management that we are looking to deploy with this legislation. A Cannabis Licensing Act to create a Cannabis Licensing Authority.
There were concerns expressed about what
we are doing wi ll encourage more usage. Well, I am
not so certain of that. And there is no evidence to
suggest that it does, that people who aren’t using now
are going to use it because they can go to a shop and buy it. I don’t believe that necessarily equates. I think
some of our Members, Mr. Speaker, must also r emember, because there was a suggestion I think by
the Honourable Opposition Leader that seemed to
propose that nearly everybody in this House would not want to encourage their son or daughter to get into a
cannabis -related business. Well, I can assure you, Mr.
Speaker, that the Honourable Member does not speak
for me. I don’t believe he actually is in a position to
actually speak for anybody in this House other than
himself.
I believe that (1) that is inaccurate and (2) the
very purpose of this Bill as we have reiterated repeatedly is to enfranchise those who have not had opportunities in the past who have found themselves pers ecuted by the rigid laws and policies that have existed around the handling of cannabis now since 1972, at
least, in this country. And the people who have found
themselves [in this] demographic are going to actually
be the first people to have the opportunity. Some of
those might be relatives of ours.
So, I can certainly say that I would be suppor tive of any young person who wanted to legitimately set up a proper licensed business under this regime,
and operate legitimately and with a sound business
model creating an opportunity for themselves. I think
we have to get away from, you know, som etimes being very orthodox of what we think is right and wrong sometimes, because that does not necessarily empower people in ways that we want to. We say we
want people to have new opportunities, but then we
put a wall to what that opportunity should look like, in
some cases, even if that opportunity can be developed, Mr. Speaker, in a legally proper framework, in a
lawful way that is actually satisfying a demand in the
community.
So I am not prepared to ascribe to the assertion by the Opposition Leader f or myself because
there may be young people in Bermuda who may
want to venture as an entrepreneur into this avenue if
they found a niche or a market or a product that they
believe will be satisfied.
And let’s not forget, Mr. Speaker, we have l egitimate pharmacies now that are licensed by the appropriate authority that sell cannabis products now. So are you saying that this pharmacist who is a Bermudian should be ashamed of being involved with selling
those cannabis -based products? I don’t think that is
what is being said. But I just wanted to make the
point, Mr. Speaker, that I think we need to often r ethink how we see things. If you are serious about expanding opportunity and growing business and deve loping new business, and if the idea, Mr. Speaker, is
that we must think outside the box as a community if
we are going to move forward into a new future, we
have to embrace it in an honest and genuine way.
Mr. Speaker, my last comment will be . . . you
know, it has been very clear what this legislation was developed for. It is to create a cannabis licensing
1210 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly framework. And I heard a number of comments from
Honourable Members, including the Member who
[spoke] after me about things that were not in the Bill.
Well, the fact of the matter is that this licensing Bil l will
create the power so that the regulations that will cr eate more specificity in many key areas will be created. Until this licensing framework is put in place, this l icensing regime and framework and the authority that
will have the capacity and the r esources to draw up
the detailed regulation, Mr. Speaker, cannot happen. The Bill says that is what will happen.
So, Mr. Speaker, we all know how legislation
works. And this is an opportunity to do something very
different in the country that has not been done in the
past. I am not going to go into the comments in rel ation to the stop list and all of that. I think that has already been pretty much answered. I think the Honourable Members again . . . we have to try our best,
Mr. Speaker. We are all perhaps imperfect in this pr ocess that we have participated in the House, but di singenuous debate does not aid in the process for the benefit of the public or anybody.
When you raise things in a debate that you
know have nothing to do with what the Bill actually is
addressing and then you criticise the Government on
those things that you say are missing, when you know
very well that the Bill has nothing to do with that, that is called disingenuous debate in my view. Because I
think we should all be genuine in what we present in
the House, Mr. Speaker, towards sound argument.
And it is not that the Government likes to run
away from its record or the issues that should be
raised around debating legislation, Mr. S peaker. No
that is not the case, because we want to ensure what
we are doing . . . as the Honourable Premier said, this
is part of a campaign promise that we promised to the
electorate. This is a part of a process that we felt
would aid in dealing with some of the issues that the
country faces. This is something that we believe will
create new opportunities.
And some of us who are a little older may not
see that right now, but the reality of the fact is that there are a lot of people interested in this. Clearly, the process that the Honourable Attorney Gener al and her
Chambers, and the team in her Ministry went through, and I must applaud them, all of them, for the work that they have done on this, which has been meticulous
and thorough, very clearly, which is why we have confidence bringing this Bill back again to start the pr ocess that we are looking to build here around the i ssue of cannabis and an industry that might be an opportunity for some people in Bermuda to do something
[to help themselves] economically.
I believe this is a good first step. This le gislation satisfies that important step for us and we will be
back here in the House again doing more in this space, Mr. Speaker. That is how this process works
because there is more regulation to be drawn up.
There may be more amendments to deal with as w e get more details around the issues that may pertain
and impact this. We will come back here to do more to
address that, so that this framework can work for the
people of Bermuda, for whom it is designed to work.
So, Mr. Speaker, with that, I move that the Bill
be committed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Honourable Member, we are now in Commi ttee of the whole House for further consideration of the
Bill entitled Cannabis Licensing Act 2022
.
Minister Roban, you have the floor.

Hon. Wal ter H. Roban: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin with a
clause- by-clause presentation of the Bill entitled the
Cannabis Licensing Act 2022.
Clause 1 provides the title of the Bill.

Yes. Continue.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
So, I move clauses 1 through 20.
Clause 1 provides the title of the Bill.
Clause 2 provides for the interpretation of
terms used i n the Bill.
Clause 3 provides that, unless expressed, the
Act does not apply to hemp, the regulation of which
will be provided in other legislation.
Clause 4 provides that the cannabis industry
provided in the Act will be regarded as a special pr ogramme for the purposes of section 6A of the Human
Rights Act 1981. It additionally provides that a special
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1211

Bermuda House of Assembly programme is one that assists a person or group of
persons to achieve equal economic opportunity in the
cannabis industry.
Clause 5 provides for the protecti on from
criminal liability under the Act for a person who is a uthorised to conduct an activity under the Act only if
that activity is conducted in strict accordance with the
Act or any regulations.
Clause 6 provides that the Minister may, by
order subject to the negative resolution procedure,
restrict certain strains of cannabis or medicinal ca nnabis from being sold, supplied, cultivated, imported
or manufactured. Before making any order to restrict a
strain or strains the Minister must consult with the A uthority and the Department of National Drug Control.
Strains may be restricted in the interest of public
health with public education measures placed to raise
awareness on any potential health risk of the restric ted strain.
Clause 7 provides the establishment of the
Cannabis Licensing Authority [“the Authority” ] with the
primary function of regulating Bermuda’s cannabis
industry as well as advising the Minister on any matter
relating to cannabis and the cannabis industry.
Clause 8 provides for the functions of the A uthority including receiving applications, granting and refusing licences, and the distribution of educational materials and organising training programmes. In addition, the Authority is able to perform any other function the Minister assigns which can include the establishing and monitoring of AML safeguards in the cannabis industry.
Clause 9 provides that the Minister may, after
consultation with the Chairman of the Authority, give the Authority directions on the policy that is to be followed by the Authority in its functions.
Clause 10 provides for the appointment of the
Executive Director of the Authority who will be r esponsible for the day -to-day management of the A uthority.
Clause 11 provides for the functions of the
Executive Director includi ng assigning personnel and
implementing operational policies and procedures in
relation to the function of the Authority and the deleg ation of those functions.
Clause 12 provides that the Executive Director, on consultation with the Minister, will establis h the
qualifications of staff for the offices of the Authority
and shall advise the Minister on appointments made
to fill those offices.
Clause 13 provides that every person having
an official duty or employed in the administration of the Act must treat al l information as confidential.
Clause 14 protects a member or employee or
agent of the Authority from liability [for] an act done under the Act in respect of any act done in good faith.
Clause 15 provides for the sums of funds and
resources of the Authorit y with the expenses of the
Authority including the remuneration of members, e m-ployees and agents being paid out of the funds of the
Authority.
Clause 16 provides the Authority must submit
expenditure budget estimates annually to the Minister
for approval.
Clause 17 provides that the Authority will
cause statements of its financial affairs to be mai ntained and prepare a statement of accounts each f inancial year.
Clause 18 provides for the tabling of annual
reports and accounts of the Authority.
Clause 19 provides that a person must be l icensed to carry on an activity in the cannabis industry
as provided in the Act.
Clause 20 provides that, to be eligible for a l icence, the applicant must (a) be over 21 years of age
and possess Bermudian status, if an individu al, or
(b) be incorporated under the laws of Bermuda, if a
body corporate.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Those are clauses
1 through 20.

Mr. Simons.
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: I am okay now.
On page 9, expenditure budget item (4). It
says, “The Authority shall not without the Minister’s
1212 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly approval spend in total in any financial year more than
the total amount of expenditure approved by the Mi nister for that financial year.”

Minister.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Mr. C hairman, certainly it is
very clear that this is an unlawful act. And there would
clearly be a need to work out the appropriate sanc-tions for that. This is not uncommon, as you know, Mr.
Chairman, in that for other authorities approval is needed from the M inister. And my own reflection on
my own responsibility is that the Authority cannot have approval for expenditure until it is signed off by an a ppropriate Minister, or the Minister responsible.

Okay, there appear to be none.
Minister, do you want to move clauses 1
through 20 for approval?

Hon. Walter H. Roban: I so move clauses 1 through
20 for approval, Mr. Chairman.

The Chair man: It has been moved that clauses 1
through 20 be approved.
Are there any objections to that?
There appear to be none, approved.
[Motion carried: Clauses 1 through 20 passed.]

Continue.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Clause 21 provides the types of licences obtainable under the Act including that those licenc es
are not transferable. These licences include —
a) a tier 1 cultivation licence; b) a tier 2 cultivation licence;
c) cannabis retail shop licence;
d) an import licence;
e) a tier 1 manufacturing licence;
f) a tier 2 manufacturing licence;
g) an export licence;
h) a research licence; and
i) a transport licence.
Clause 22 provides for a cannabis event l icence and how a person is able to apply for that l icence. It also provides that a cannabis event may be
a public or private event that is infrequent or temporary, where there is either int ent for profit or no intent
for profit from the sale or supply of cannabis only to
invited guests over 21 years of age.
Clause 23 provides for the inspection of a
premises the subject of a licence application prior to the grant of a licence. An inspector will have the po wer to enter the premises to conduct inspections, i ncluding taking photographs of the premises and wal king around the premises to establish the boundaries.
Clause 24 provides for requirements, Mr.
Chairman, of the appli cation for a licence. The appl icant must submit a $250 non- refundable application
fee along with the completed application form, valid identification as proof of age and a current criminal
record check from the Bermuda Police Service.
Clause 25 gives the Authority the power t o
decide to grant or refuse a licence application.
Clause 26 provides that a person with a crim inal conviction for a drug or other offence may apply
for a licence provided that the conviction is disclosed during the application process. The application of a
person with a criminal conviction may be granted if the Authority is satisfied the applicant will be compliant
with the requirements of the Act and any regulations
but does not require the Authority to grant the licence.
Clause 27, Mr. Chairman, provid es that the
Authority will notify an applicant, in writing, of his approval of an application.
Clause 28 provides the terms and conditions
applicable to each licence. The absolute terms and conditions of licences include that an applicant must
not employ a person under 21 years of age, the di splay of a licence in a conspicuous place and inspector’s ability to enter a licen sed premise to inspect and
monitor activity.
Clause 29, Mr. Chairman, provides the
grounds on which the Authority may decide to refuse
to grant a licence including not being satisfied on reasonable grounds of the suitability of the location,
premises or proposed security measures or that the
required application fee has not been paid.
Clause 30 provides that a licence may be varied, in wri ting, on the Authority’s initiative or on appl ication by the licensee.
Clause 31 pr ovides the way in which a licensee is able to apply for the variation of a licence.
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1213

Bermuda House of Assembly Clause 32 provides for the duration of a l icence which will be valid for a period of two years
from the date of issue and may be renewed with the
prescribed licence fee paid annually.
Clause 33 provides for the application for the
renewal of a licence to be made in writing, to be in a form determined by the Authority and accompanied by
the prescribed fee.
Clause 34, Mr. Chairman, gives the Authority
the power to revoke, in writing, a licence in certain
circumstances such as the breach of a condition of a licence or the licensee has engaged in conduct that is
an offence under the Misuse of Drugs Act [1972], the
Pharmacy and Poisons Act [1979], the Criminal Justice (International Co- operation) (Bermuda) Act 1994
or the Proceeds of Crime Act 1997.
Clause 35 provides that a person aggrieved
by a decision of the Authority may appeal to the Ma gistrate ’s Court within 21 days of the date on which any
notice from the Authority takes effect.
Clause 36 provides that a licensee may surrender a licence by giving notice in writing of the inte ntion to do so with the surrender of the licence taking effect on a date approved by the Authority.
Clause 37 provides that where there is a theft
of cannabis in his possession, the licensee must pr ovide a written report to the Authority and report the theft to an inspector.
Clause 38 provides for the authorisation of
analy sts to analyse any cannabis or medicinal cannabis substance, product or sample of any substance,
product purporting to be a cannabis or medicinal cannabis.
Clause 39 provides that an inspector may
submit for analysis any cannabis substance or product
or medicinal cannabis substance or product taken by
that inspector to an authorised analyst for analysis.
Clause 40 provides that a certificate of an authorised analyst may be used in any proceedings for
an offence under the Act.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, that i s my prese ntation on clauses 21 through 40.

Continue.
Hon. Walter H. Roban: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Clause 41 empowers the Authority to desi gnate inspectors to obtain information as required in
regulating and enforcing Bermuda’s cannabis industry.
Clause 42 provi des for inspectors to obtain a
warrant from a magistrate for suspected withheld information that the inspector wishes to obtain.
Clause 43 creates the offence and penalties
for a person or body corporate conducting an activity
under the Act without a lice nce.
Clause 44 provides for various offences under
the Act including engaging in the use of cannabis in a
public place except at a licensed [cannabis] retail
shop or at a cannabis event, the sale or supply of
cannabis to a person under 21 years of age, the possession of cannabis that is more than 7 grams in a
public place unless authorised under a licence, and
handling cannabis with intent to supply whether by
him or another person without the relevant licence that
permits supply.
Clause 45 provides that if an offence commi tted by a body corporate is proved to be committed with the consent of or attributable to neglect on the
part of any director, manager or other officer, the officer and the body corporate will be liable to be pr oceeded against.
Clause 46 provides that where there is the
failure of a convicted person to pay a fine imposed by
the court, the court has the power to immediately r evoke the person’s licence.
Clause 47 gives a police officer of any rank
the power to seize an amount of cannabis equal to or
more than 7 grams from a person in possession of it
in a public place without the relevant licence under the Act to do so.
1214 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly Clause 48 provides that 20 grams is the stat utory amount deemed for supply where a person is
charged with an offence relating to cannabis and su pply is an element of the offence.
Clause 49 provides for consecutive sentencing for offences involving cannabis and offences relating to violence or use of weapons.
Clause 50 provides for the defence of lack of
knowledge for the offences provided in section 44(1) of the Act, including a) engaging in the use of cannabis in a public place except at a licensed cannabis
retail ship or cannabis event; b) the sale or supply of
cannabis to a person under 21 years of age;
c) possession of cannabis that is more than 7 grams
in a public place unless authorised under a licence;
and d) handling cannabis with intent to supply whether
by him or another person without the relevant licence that permits supply.
Clause 51 provides that the Minister [will] carry out a review of the Act within two years of the Act coming into operation and submit a report to the Le gislature within 12 months after submitting the review.
Clause 52 empowers the Minister to make
regulations and includes a general regulation- makin g
power which enabl es regulations to be made as r equired in the cannabis industry including any required AML measures and regulations for the safe custody, storage and security of all locally cultivated cannabis
or medicinal cannabis.
Clause 53 provides that the Authority may,
with the approval of the Minister, issue guidance on the regulation of cannabis and medical cannabis.
Clause 54 provides amendments to the Mi suse of Drugs Act 1972 to remove cannabis as a con-trolled drug and amends that Act to remove the defin itions for “cannabis,” and “cannabis resin”; by removing the statutory amount of cannabis deemed to be for
supply; and by removing the statutory thresholds in
Schedule 8 with reference to all to be referred to in the
Act.
Clause 55 provides consequential amendments to the Government Authorities (Fees) Act 1971 and the Pharmacy and Poisons Act 1979.
Clause 56 provides for the commencement of
the Act, that it will be on a date appointed by the Mi nister by notice in the Gazette.
Schedule 1 provides f or the constitution of the
Cannabis Licensing Authority and the procedures the
Authority must follow.
Schedule 2 provides the application fee and
the fees applicable to licences under the Act.
Schedule 3 provides additional licensing r equirements for culti vation licences, manufacturing l icences, importation licences, export licences, r esearch licences and transport licences, as well as additional terms and conditions for each licence.
Schedule 4 provides additional licensing and
operational requirements for cannabis retail shops,
including permitted hours, conduct in retail shops and police powers. It also provides offences for allowing
the sale of cannabis and entry into a cannabis retail
shop to a person under 21 years of age. Procuring
cannabis for a pers on under 21 years of age is also
an offence.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, that is my prese ntation on clauses 41 through 56 and the related
Schedules.

Honourable Cole Simons, you have
the floor.
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: I would like direct the Mini ster to [clause 51], review of the Act. He indicated that he would submit a report to both Houses of the Legi slature. Can the Minister confi rm that this report will
contain details on the social impact, the criminal i mpact, the economic benefit and impact, the health i mpact, and any . . . let me stop there, I can’t read my
handwriting.

It could be that, yes.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Yes, clause 52[(2)](j), and it
speaks to “regulating and controlling the advertising
by any person of cannabis, including the form and
content of advertisements;” and my question is: As
this is an industry for Bermuda, will the advertising
campaign be part of our national tourism strategy as
prescribed and defined and used by the Bermuda
Tourism Authority? And will the advertising campaign
be used for airlines, cruise ships? And will they be
used overseas or is this strictly a local campaign?

I’m sorry?

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Cannabis Licensing Authority established by section 6 of the Cannabis Licensing
Act . . . should that not be 2022 instead of 2020? I am
just asking.
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1215

Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Walter H. Roban: Yes. The answer is yes. That
should be a process that the Honourable Attorney
General’s Chambers uses to amend these matters. I
think we did initially ensure, as you know, Honourable
Member, that this Bill was just by virtue of its tabling, that is the only amendment that was being made to
bring it back. So that can run right to this as well.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Okay.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: No need to go through a pr ocess with that. This is a minor amendment that the
Attor ney General’s Chambers can make.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Right.
You can answer those questions while I go
through the rest of the legislation, if you do not mind.

No, that’s fine.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Okay, in relation to [clause
52] where the Honourable Member asked a question
about advertising. Those are issues that will be worked out by the Authority between the Cannabis
Licensing Authority and the Tourism Authority. Any
objectives about how we might link our industry to our promotion as a visitor destination will be worked out
between the two respective authorities once that is
established a nd they establish their relationship. So I
would leave that to the Authority to work out with the
BTA as to within their respective interests and r esponsibilities.
Going forward, your other [question] was on
clause 54? Was it 54, Member? Or 55?

The Chair man: [Clause 54].
Hon. Walter H. Roban: Sorry, could the Honourable
Member repeat his question for my benefit on clause
54?

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: What page is it on?

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Page 28. We also have
[clause] 55 on page 28.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: I have to go back to it.
Hang on. I’m checking to see what else I have.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Your comment on [clause] 55
was on [page] 28, but you had something on [clause]
54? Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: No, I did not.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Okay, all right. Well, those
were the two clauses that the questions were on, Mr.
Chairman, unless the Honourable Member has more
questions.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Yes, I do.

Continue.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Page 39, under Import Licence, and that is [Schedule 3 paragraph] 10(b), “name and address of the exporter in the country of
export.”
My question is, Who does the assessment of
the exporter to ensure that we are dealing with a repu-table organisation and that they are a partner that this
country would want to do business with? And do we
show the KYC or have files on the exporter, KYC and
AML documents? Are they required to be held by the
Authority in the event that they are expected to ensure that exporters are vetted and assessed to ensure that
they are quality organisations?

Yes, most certainly.
Hon. Walter H. Roban: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
One thing that we have identified, Mr. Chai rman, is that we will only be able to export to other
countries that the law will allow us to do so. So, every
country that has set up a cannabis industry has an
authority itself. Just as in other industries, the Honourable Member should appreciate that with banking
or insurance, we correspond with the like authority in
the country to confirm the reputable licence standing of that party who it is being exported to so they can
receive these goods, that they can handle these
goods. And certainly any financial information that is
needed to confirm that they are reputable can be ex-tracted from the authority and validated. Certainly if
the licensee in Bermuda has it then they can provide it
to us. But we can confirm it with the reputable author ity in the other jurisdiction.
One thing that is clearly stated in the presentation of this Bill is that we would only be dealing with
other persons in jurisdictions where there is permi ssion to export as well. We are not going to be expor ting to countries or jurisdictions that do not allow e xports. And all jurisdictions thus far have their own cor-responding authority that will be similar to ours that we
can deal with to confirm those details.

Are there a ny further questions?

1216 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Yes, page 48, Terms and
conditions.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Which clause, Mr. Chairman?
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: [Schedule 4 paragraph] 8(f)
and (g).
Hon. Walter H. Roban: Yes.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: It says at (g) “the maximum
amount of cannabis that can be sold to a patr on in a
transaction is 7 grams of dried cannabis or an equiv alent amount.”
Is there a time limit tied to the frequency of
sale, i.e., I go to a cannabis coffee shop. I have 7
grams. I go out and come back in 30 minutes and buy
another 7 grams. Is that per missible or not? Is there
any time constraint associated with this?

Minister.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: That is not a question I can
answer now. Those are procedures and that will be
part of the regulatory process as drawn up by the a uthorit y. Obviously, I understand the scenario that the
Honourable Member is describing, someone could go
to a coffee shop, somebody might go to another entity
and buy 7 grams somewhere else. That sort of behaviour I am not sure is possible to regulate. But certainl y,
that will be something —

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: [INAUDIBLE]
Hon. Walter H. Roban: May I just finish, Mr. Chai rman?
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Go ahead.

Yes, continue.

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Certainly, there may be a way
to sort of track t hat a person does not buy here, if the
authority chooses to regulate that sort of behaviour,
there may be a way to track the purchase and sale to
people within a certain time, but we would leave those decisions up to the authority to shape in conjunction
with the relevant parties. That is the job of the author ity. That specific detail of operation or beh aviour
should be sort of shaped by the authority itself in its
responsibilities at this point.

Okay.
The Clerk: If they are calling for names, ever yone has
to have their video on because I need to see you,
based on the amendment to the Standing Orders. If
we are meeting virtually , we should be seeing your
face, based on a report on Friday, 22 May 2020. So
everyone please turn on your cameras and I will be
calling names.
We will wait two minutes, per the Standing
Orders. It is now 6:15. At 6:17 I will call names.
[Paus
e]
The Clerk: Will everyone please turn on your camera?
Okay, we are doing a vote on the second
reading of the Cannabis Licensing Act 2022. This is for the approval of the Bill after second reading in
Committee. Okay, I will call names.
DIVISION
[Cannabis Licensing Act 2022]
Ayes: 18 Nays: 6
Hon. E. David Burt Mr. L. Craig Cannonier
Ms. Crystal Caesar Hon. M. H. Dunkley
Mr. Vance Campbell Ms. Susan E. Jackson
Ms. Lovitta F. Foggo Mr. Scott Pearman
Hon. Tinee Furbert Mr. Jarion Richardson
Hon. Jason Hayward Hon. N. H. C. Simons
Mr. Dennis Lister III
Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain
Hon. Walter H. Roban
Hon. W . Lawrence Scott
Mr. Jamahl S. Simmons
Mr. Scott Simmons
Mrs. Ianthia Simmons -Wade
Mr. Hubert (Kim) E. Swan
Mr. Neville S. Tyrrell
Mr. Jason Wade

The Bill has been reported as printed.
For clarity on this matter, because I have had
inquiries made to me by Members this afternoon, the clarity is that this Bill now goes back to the Senate
and no matter what the outcome in the Senate, if the vote is the same as it was before, the Bill will still pr oceed on to the Governor. Okay? I hope that provides
some clarity to those who were asking questions r egarding the process for this Bill.
Thank you, Members. We will now move on to the next item on the
Order Paper for today, which is the second reading of the Children Amendment Act 2022 in the name of the Minister of Social Development.
Minister.
1218 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Tinee Furbert: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to
present the Bill titled the Children Amendment Act
2022, which was tabled in this Honourable House on
18 March 2022.
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the Bill is to
modernise—

Are there any objections to that?
There are none. Continue on, Minister.

Hon. Tinee Furbert: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

BILL

SECOND READING

CHILDREN AMENDMENT ACT 2022
Hon. Tinee Furbert: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to
present the Bill entitled the Children Amendment Act
2022, which was tabled in this Honourable House on
18 March 2022.
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the Bill is to
modernise the law and to introduce new and revised provisions under the Children Act of 1998, the princ ipal Act, which are long overdue. The amendment will
ensure that a new body, namely the Children In- Care
Advisory Council is established to replace the existing
Child Care Placement Board. The new Children InCare Advisory Council membership is designed to
include persons with skill sets in specific areas such
as medical, legal and educational fields, and a Stand-ing Committee is established to provide a forum that
guarantees children in- care who are capable of for ming their own view [and] have a voice on matters r elated to their own social development and well -being.
Mr. Speaker, the additional responsibilities of
the Council will include inquiring into and reporting on
any matter referred by the Minister, informing the Mi nister of and making recommendations on matters r elating to the social development and well -being of
children in- care; promoting and protecting the rights of
children in- care, and considering the effect of any le gislation, Government policies, programme or standard may have on children in- care and making recommendations to the Minister; and raising public awareness of and encouraging community interests in issues affecting children in- care.
Mr. Speaker, addi tionally, the Department of
Child and Family Services intends to introduce a nonstatutory youth panel for children in- care to sit on. The
youth panel will have the opportunity to present their
thoughts and/or concerns to the new Standing Committee on the Advisory Council which will be referred
to as the Advisory Council Committee.
Mr. Speaker, the Advisory Council Committee
will be established under clause 4 of the Bill and will introduce a new section 12B in the principal Act ult imately assuring that th ere will be a legislative prov ision in place to take into consideration the voice of
children in- care. This application of the law would allow the intent of Articles 12 and 13 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child to be enshrined in the
principal Act.
Article 12 of the Convention says:
“1. States Parties shall assure to the child who is c apable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the
child, the views of the child being given due weight in
accordance with the age and maturity of the child.
“2. For this purpose, the child shall in particular be provided the opportunity to be heard in any judicial
and administrative proceedings affecting the child,
either directly, or through a representative or an appropriate body, in a manner consistent with the proc edural rules of national law.”
“Article 13 of the Convention states:
“1. The child shall have the right to freedom of ex-pression; this right shall include freedom to seek, r eceive and impart information and ideas of all kinds,
regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of
the child's choice.
“2. The exercise of this right may be subject to certain
restrictions, but these shal l only be such as are pr ovided by law and are necessary:
“(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of ot hers; or
“(b) For the protection of national security or of
public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.”
Additionally, Mr. Speaker, currently section
12(2) of the principal Act provides limited information
about the composition of the Board in comparison to other legislation.
Clause 5 of the Bill enhances the principal Act
by inserting the Fourth Schedule and introduces vital information concerning Children In- Care Advisory
Council such as the composition of the Council, me mbership is to include, but not be limited to, persons with certain skill sets, such as medical, legal, and educational fields.
Mr. Speaker, I must take this opportun ity to
highlight that persons who were former children in -
care with the Director of Child and Family Services will
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1219

Bermuda House of Assembly have the opportunity to serve as members of Council.
It was key to ensure this specific provision was in
place as these individuals will bring a unique perspective to the Council with their own experiences as a
child in -care.
The Director of Child and Family Services and
up to three other public officers of the Department of
Child and Family Services designated by the Director
shall be ex officio members with no voting powers. Mr.
Speaker, this provision will allow for the Council to work collaboratively with the Department of Child and Family Services to ensure the voice of a child is clearly heard and considered when decisions are being
made about their social development and well -being.
The remaining provisions ensure that Council
membership reflects a gender balance. The term of
the office a member can hold, which is not to exceed
three years, addresses vacancy in membership, form
of the Council, powers conferred by the Minister to
declare the office of a member vacant, provisions for
re-appoint and resignations and authority for the
Council to regulate its own procedures.
Mr. Speaker, to provide some context to this
new amendment it is important to note that the Chi ldren Act of 1998 was designed to benefit all children
in Bermuda, regardless if they are in care of their parents, guardians or the Director of Child and Family Services. The purpose of the Children Act 1998 is to
protect childre n from harm, promote the integrity of
the family, provide protection for the rights of children
amongst persons who have regular contact with chi ldren, and to ensure the welfare of children. With that
understanding, the legislative amendments being i ntroduced by this Bill, the Children Amendment Act
2022, will provide important enhancements to the
Children Act 1998.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to remind Honourable Members and the public of the 2020 Speech from the Throne delivered on November 6, 2020, which states, “The seed of the ‘ new
liberty ’ will be planted in the Island’s vulnerable chi ldren. The outdated Child Care Placement Board will
be replaced by a Children’s Commission, whose remit will be to advocate for the children in care, promoting
best practice policy, programmes and service r esponses to meet their needs.”
For your reference and for public information,
Mr. Speaker, a child in- care is one who is placed in
the care of the Director by the courts of Bermuda. The
courts are able to exercise their powers to make either
a care order or an interim care order under section 25 and section 32 of the Children Act [1998].
Overall, Mr. Speaker, this Bill confirms the
Government’s commitment to planting the seed of
new liberty by upho lding the best interests and well -
being of children in- care so that they can exercise
their right to be heard on matters affecting their own social development and well -being while in care. This is truly an innovative legislative change which will empower our most vulnerable children.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, it should be noted that
extensive research was conducted on various chi ldren’ s commission s in various jurisdictions, namely,
Malta, En gland, Jer sey and Jamaica. The analysis
conducted by the Mi nistry of Social Developm ent in
conjunction with the Department of Child and Family
Services indicates that a majority of children’s commissions in other j urisdictions are independent of parliament and gov ernment, are not specific to children
in-care, and have commissioner s that are appointed in
full-time posts with support staff.
Locally, Mr. Speaker, the Ministry engaged in
consultation with non- profit agencies and committees
that work with, or for the betterment of, children in our
community. I am pleased to notify Honourable Mem-bers and the public that responses were submitted by
the following agencies and committees: Bar Council
Sub-committee that focuses on family law, Coalition
for the Protection of Children, Family Centre, Inter
Agency Committee for Children and Family, and Saving Children and Revealing Secrets (SCARS). The
comments received by these organisations were in
depth and informative and taken into consideration in
drafting this Bill.
Mr. Speaker, representatives from these organisations were also invited to attend a follow -up
meeting that gave me an opportunity to update them
on the process and inform them that the body would
be established to replace the Child Care Placement
Board and that it would not be called a Children’s Commission, but would be designated to ac hieve the
same aims and protections. During this meeting I r eceived positive feedback regarding the direction the
Ministry was taking.
I would also like to take this opportunity to
thank the representatives of the Bar Council SubCommittee that focuses on family law, the Coalition for the Protection of Children, the Family Centre, the
Inter Agency Committee for Children and Family, and
SCARS, for taking the time to submit in depth submi ssions and for participating in the virtual meetings.
Mr. Speaker, to ens ure the Ministry consulted
with the general public I provided an invitation for the
public to make submissions on their views on the pr oposed Children’s Commission by way of Royal G azette articles published on 23 August 2021, entitled
“Children’s Commissio n submissions can still be
made.” I can report that this Ministry did not receive any submissions from the public.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Director of Child and Family Services and his technical team , the team at the Attorney
General’s Chambers, and the Permanent Secretary’s
technical staff at the Ministry of Social Development
Headquarters for their continuous dedication to e nsure that this Bill materialised.
1220 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Speaker, in closing, this Government has
remained steadfast in its commitment to our most vulnerable children to ensure that they too feel empowered by knowing that they have the right to have their
voices heard on matters impacting their social deve lopment and well -being while in care of the Director of
Child and Family Services. The provisions in this Bill
will enhance the Children Act 1998 and ensure that it continues to comply with international Conventions.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and
thank you Honourable Minister.
The Opposition is supportive of the Children
Amendment Act 2022. And we thank the Honourable
Minister for her presentation to this Honourable
House. We do not really have all that much to say on
it, although I do have two or three questions for the Minister which, hopefully, she can address.
As we understand it, this is reviewing the
Children Act 1998, the principal Act, and the former
Child Care Placement Board will be replaced with a
Children In- Care Advisory Council. So the Board is
now to become a Council. The Council is to have
more responsibility. In addition, three members of the
Council will form a Standing Committee which Committee will include the Chair of the Council and two
others from the Advisory Council.
The question that we have on this, just a couple, children in- care obviously means a child in r espect of whom a care order has been made. So we
were wondering whether or not the children who are in
the transitional living phase, a sort of post -care order
phase, who may or may not be subject to a care order, whether they would fall under t he remit of the
Council, notwithstanding the absence of a care order and notwithstanding the fact that they would not tec hnically be children in- care as defined in the legislation,
although we would think of them in a normal way as
being children in- care.
So perhaps the Honourable Minister could just
clarify that point.
I note that on page two of the Bill . . . actually,
I will ask that in Committee. The only other point that
we would be grateful for commentary on is under
clause [4] [new section] 12B(3). That is where it
makes a responsibility upon the Standing Committee
to provide for children in- care who are capable of
forming their own views to be heard on matters relat-ing to their social development and well -being, by way of a forum heard from time to time as the Committee
considers appropriate. We would be grateful to hear from the Honourable Minister what exactly that means
in practice.
One way of reading that could be that the
Committee will hold a forum every now and again. Another way of reading that is the Committee will be
responsible for meeting with children in- care or at
least all of those capable of forming their own views
on a regular basis as part of the function of the Committee. So we would be grateful for what the Honour-able Minister has in mind there.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We are supportive of
this Bill and it is nice to see steps being taken by this Minister in respect of care for our children within the
historic inadequacies under multiple governments.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, Mr. Speaker.
I will start off by sa ying that how a society
treats its vulnerable, its children and its seniors is always a measure of humanity. This Children Amend-ment Act is in line with the Government’s pledge to
review and modernise legislation. Like the Minister
said, this is definitely long overdue.
I will highlight the two most significant aspects
of this Act, which is the Child In- Care Advisory Board
and also the Standing Committee for the non- statutory
Youth Panel. First of all, I applaud the Minister for giving
children a voice b y being included in this panel. I also
applaud the Minister for including a wide range of people with various skill sets on the panel. And, most
importantly, having an opportunity for individuals who
were previously in care to sit on this particular Com-mittee.
Right now, there are 76 children in care. Of
the 76, three are overseas and 12 children are in res idential care facilities. I take this opportunity to commend the Director of Child and Family Services, Mr.
Mabury and his team for their work. I also commend all of the third sector agencies that work with our chi ldren as well.
Mr. Speaker, too often I hear people saying
that children in- care come from single- [parent] homes.
I actually take exception because I am a single parent. Children in- care from two -parent households, they
also come from single- parent households. Very often
there are so many different issues why children end
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1221

Bermuda House of Assembly up in care. The fortunate thing is that by having Child
and Family Services and also with this amendment to
the Children Act there is somewhere for people to go
and there is a voice for the children. Very often what
happens is the voice ends up being in the newspaper, or on the radio, or with the parent saying something.
At least this affords the opportunity for them to be able
to speak. Mr. Speaker, all of us as parents are commi tted to doing our best for our children. There is no rulebook for parenting. The bottom line is that som etimes things don’t work, and you need help and you
need assistance. That is why we have the Chi ldren
Amendment Act, that is why we have the Department
of Child and Family Services, and that is why we have
the Ministry of Social Development and Seniors.
Mr. Speaker, I digress a bit. Forty years ago I
had the opportunity to work at Pag et Island when I
was in university. This was the first time I had the exposure to the number of children who were in care. I
almost felt like I had lived in a whole other world b ecause these children were hidden, they were behind
closed doors, and most of the time you di d not know
they were there. The fortunate thing now is that we
have ministries and we have teams, we have Child
and Family Services that work with these children and
there is a greater public awareness.
Mr. Speaker, I commend the Minister for
bringing th is amendment to the Children Act because
it does not just relate to children in- care, it relates to
all of our children. Thank you, Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member.
Does any other Member wish to make a contribution at thi s time?
No other.
Minister.

Hon. Tinee Furbert: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to thank Honourable Members who
have spoken for their support of this Bill. This Bill does
not come without a lot of sweat and tears to be able to ensure that we were having the voices of children re presented, particularly children in- care.
We grow up thinking, or knowing, or hearing
that children must be seen and not heard. And particularly in this age of technology, they would have
access to all sorts of information. If they have smart
phones, smart devices, even in school they have the
opportunity to have access to technology that som etimes they are learning information and getting information before their guardians, their parents, can even
get to them. So they are able to form views on many
issues which face us as individuals. We felt that it was
very important to ensure that this could happen by way of a youth forum in the Act.
To answer the question in regard to children
who transition out of care and whether or not the Council would apply to them, the Children Act is appl icable to children who are under the age of 18. So per-sons who age out are 18 years and older. This does
not mean that they will not have a way to be able to
[voice their viewpoints], particularly [if they are those]
who are choosing to take advantage of transitional
living programmes . So there will be a mechanism in
place for them to still share their views. So that will not be taken away.
And then to explain the terminology or the
language around “from time to time.” The Chairman actually makes that decision, Mr. Speaker. What I
would expect as a Minister is that the Chairman would
exercise that opportunity to be able to allow the chi ldren in- care to speak up about views. So whatever
the Chairman feels necessary , I would say at least
once or twice a year; it could be more, but the Chai rman does exercise that right. If they do not exercise
that right, then this legislation that we are passing t oday would be in vain. So that will be encouraged, ac-tually.
I just want to thank my honourable colleagues
for their questions, and thank my colleagues for their support, and that is it, Mr. Speaker.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. Tinee Furbert: Clause 1 is self -explanatory.
Clause 2 deletes the definition of “Board” and
inserts a definition for “Children In- Care Advisory
Council ,” “Advisory Council ,” and “Advisory Council
Committee. ”
Clause 3 repeals section 12 of the principal
Act.
1222 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly Clause 4 inserts a new section 12A and section 12B. Section 12A establishes the Children InCare Advisory Council with additional responsibilities
that includes advising and making recommendations
to the Minister on matters relating to the social development and well -being of children in- care, promoting
and protecting the rights of children in- care, and considering the effect legislation, Government policies and programmes may have upon children in- care and
making recommendations to the Minister. Section 12A also provides for fees to be paid to Council members, and defines “children in- care” and “matters relating to
the social development and well -being of children incare.” Section 12B establishes a Standing Committee of the Advisory Council to be known as the “Advisory Council Committee.” The Standing Committee will be
responsible for providing children in- care with a forum
by which they may be heard on matters relating to their social development and well -being. Fees are to
be paid to members of the Committee, and the Committee must observe policies and procedures adopted by the Council in the performance of its responsibil ities.
Clause 5 inserts a Fourth Schedule to the
princ ipal Act which, among other things, sets out the
constitution of the Children In- Care Advisory Council,
and specifies the qualifications of persons who may be appointed to the Council by the Minister.
Clause 6 makes consequential amendments
to the Government Authorities (Fees) Act 1971 by d eleting the reference to the “Child Care Placement
Board” and inserting the “Children In- Care Advisory
Council” and the “Advisory Council Committee.”
Clause 7 provides for termination of the a ppointment of members to the Child Care Placement
Board on the day this Act comes into operation, and
for any outstanding matters of the Board to be conti nued and determined by the Children In- Care Advisory
Council.
Clause 8 provides for this Act to come into
operation by notice publi shed in the Gazette.

Thank you, very much.
Minister, the question that I had was on page
1 of the Bill, clause 2. And it was a matter raised in the
debate, which was this idea of a definition of a child
in-care, and whether it is limited only to those children
who have care orders, or whether it would extend to
children in transitional living. I am sorry, it is [clause 4, new section 12A] subsection (5), page 2. So it is clause 4, all the way down at subsection (5) and it has
the definition of children in -care. And it says, “means
children in respect of whom a care order has been
made . . .” I am not sure I caught your answer in the
debate, but I just pose the question again. Thank you.

Minister.

Hon. Tinee Furbert: Mr. Chairman, if I am understanding the question correctly, he is asking for clarif ication for what children in -care means. So, again, it
would be a child who has a care order, or a child who
has an interim care order. This, again, applies to persons who are under the age of 18.
So a person who is a young adult, who is 18,
will not . . . this will not apply to [them] because they
are now 18, they are now considered an adult.
The question from what I heard before was
around whether or not this would apply if they are tak-ing advantage of the transitional living programme and
I had mentioned prior that there will be avenues in
place where if there were any concerns a young adult
needed to voice their concerns, that there would be
opportunities to do so.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Yes, still under clause 4 of the
Bill, and still at page 2, there is a reference to the fees
paid to the members of the Advisory Council. Is there
a separate fee for the three people who are on the
Standing Committee?
Hon. Tinee Furbert: Thank you, Honourable Member,
for that question. No, there is not a separate fee. Are
you speaking to the actual amount? No, it i s not di fferent.

Thank you.
Still under clause 4, but this time over at page
3 of the Bill, starting at the bottom of page 2 where it is talking about the Advisory Council and the insertion
of [section] 12B, going over the page to subsection
(3), and it was the matter we were discussing in debate. I apologise again if I did not hear your answer. But I was just looking for some clarity on this forum
that this Standing Committee is going to hold with
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1223

Bermuda House of Assembly children who are capable of forming their own views to
be heard. Could you just explain what “forum” is
meant to mean in that context? Thank you so much.

Hon. Tinee Furbert: Mr. Chairman, the forum would
be expressed in having two members of the Advisory
Council as well as the Chairman. And then not less
than two children in- care who would be able to pr ovide views to the Advisory Council. This format was
chosen so that children do not feel intimidat ed by ha ving the actual whole Council. They would feel more
comfortable by having fewer persons to speak to and
share their views. But it does not mean that it just has
to be two. It can definitely be more than two children
to form a forum, who would have the opportunity to express those views.

It has been moved that the Bill be
repor ted to the House.
Are there a ny objections to that?
There appear to be none. The Bill will be r eported to the House.
[Motion carried: The Children Amendment Act 2022
was considered by a Committee of the whole House
and passed without amendment.]

The Ch airman: Mr. Speaker.

House resumed at 6:59

[Hon. Dennis P. Lister, Jr., Speaker, in the Chair]

REPORT OF COMMITTEE

CHILDREN AMENDMENT ACT 2022

Thank you, Deputy.
Members, are there any objections to the Bill
entitled the Children Amendment Act 2022 being r eported to the House as printed?
There are none. It has been reported as printed.
Members, that brings us to a close of the
items on the Order Paper for discussion today. We will
now go back and do the third readings. The first third
reading is by the Premier for his Bill titled the Gaming
Designated Site Act . . . order. No, that was an order.
Okay, no we just have the Cannabis and the Children
Acts. All of the others were orders or regulations.
So, Deputy Premier, are you going to d o the
third reading?

1224 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21

Hon. Walter H. Roban: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Can
you see me?

Thank you, Members for your contrib ution today.
Premier, or Deputy Premier.

ADJOURNMENT

Hon. E. David Burt: I am here, Mr. Speaker.
I am certainly due to speak, Mr. Speaker. But
I move that this Honourable House do now adjourn
until the date of 6 May 2022. However, Mr. Speaker, I
know that we have not had an opportunity to speak
today. There may be a need to recall the House earl ier in order to pass special legislation for the Fairmont
Southampton property. But at this point in time I would like to move that the House do now adjourn until
6 May 2022, until you and I have the opportunity to
speak, Mr. Speaker.

I obviously do not want the gavel
to go down, Mr. Speaker, so I will speak.
Mr. Speaker, I have been troubled, and my
heart is heavy at the increased gang violence in our community. Last week, Thursday, I had the occasion
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1225

Bermuda House of Assembly to go down to constituency 14 and speak with two
mothers who were totally blindsided and totally upset
with issues of violence that were taking place in the
community. My heart was heavy as I went into the
One Way Deepdale area and I talked to the residents. They shared with me that the y were tired, that they
were overcome, that their kids were not able to play in
their yards, and they were really, really concerned
about the violence. And I reflected on the challenge.
We stayed in their living room and we talked,
and I listened to them and we shared together. They
spoke about how in years past the neighbourhood
was the place for everyone to congregate. The interesting thing, Mr. Speaker, that One Way Deepdale, as
you know, Mr. Speaker, is about 800 metres from my parents’ house where I grew up, right off of Happy
Valley. So, not only is this a challenge for our consti tuency, for me and my leadership, this is a challenge for my family as well.
I looked around and they lamented the young
men who were doing antisocial behaviour in their
neighbourhood. I walked through the house, Mr.
Speaker, and the homeowner showed me a wall where the bullets were in the wall. She showed me
the area where the assailants came through the
bush es whilst their children played very closely next
door. And the c ommunity was upset.
Last night about 20 people in the neighbourhood gathered, the Commissioner of Police was there.
Members of the community were there. And everyone
came together. It was a collective notification that the
community has had enough. The c ommunity banded
together with prayers from Ms. Smith of Evening Light
Church. She and her husband, Brother Burrows
played out loud for the community.
And they said that this is something that not
only the police (and the Commissioner of Police was
there) have increased their patrols in the neighbourhood, they have assigned a liaison officer. The co mmunity realises that they have to work together, and at
that moment we organised a community watch, at that
moment we put together a WhatsApp group, at that
mom ent we realised that we could not go up the hill
and scream and shout at the young men because those young men were part of the community as well.
And if they go off the hill without a plan, without jobs, without them understanding their important place wi thin our community, they would simply take that antis ocial behaviour somewhere else. And we realised that as a community we had to work for these young men,
not only [to make them] see that their activity is wrong,
but [for them] to see that this community has a place
for them as well.
So, yes, we want the violence to stop. Yes,
we want the police to continue to do what they are
doing. We support the work of the Gang Violence C oordinator and his team. But the community realised that not only do we have a r esponsibility to do our
neighbourhood watches to make sure our ring camer-as are working, to hold the police accountable, for the
police to increase their patrols in our community, and
they are. But as a community, we have to work with
these young men to see that they have a place in our
community to see that there has to be another way for
them to find and make a living.
And I am not saying that they should not be
held accountable for their bad actions and that when
the police have them for those actions, that they
should not face the consequences of the court. That is not what I am saying. I am saying that we have to have a community -based approach. I am saying that
the residents have shown that they are angry, that
they are upset, that they cannot continu e this way of
life.
I just want to affirm, Mr. Speaker, that cries of
the residents of One Way Deepdale, that together as
a community we will get through it. But we will hold
the men accountable. Not only have we been down
[there] this week and weeks prior , we will continue to
work with them to give them examples, to give them
hope, to tell the young men that are sitting next to the street that we will enrol them and help them in the
GED programme at the Hamilton Seventh- day A dventist Church as promised, so that they can come
out and get a productive opportunity in our community.
Yes, the gang violence must stop. Yes, the
shooting must stop. But we will work with the young men in the part of our community to make sure that
they have other opportunities. We w ill make sure that
the community feels safer, that kids can play safely,
and we will continue to work together, Mr. Speaker, to
bury this scourge of gang violence, to hold our young
men accountable, but also to make sure that we give
our seniors in that ne ighbourhood the opportunity to
know that they are loved and that they will be protec ted by this Government.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much; I probably will not need 20 minutes, but thanks for the opportunity.
1226 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly Very briefly, there are a few things that appear
to now be the norm in our communities [which] are
sort of worrying me. That is the line I am going to take
this evening. My subject surrounds increased violence
and a lack of kindness to each other.
Mr. Speaker, I was about to describe the i ncrease of violence as unprovoked violence. But I am
not close enough to it to have it all described as u nprovoked. S o, I will not go down that line.
Mr. Speaker, we have recently seen played
out violence that has touched our sporting activities. In
one instance we have had two young men in the U nder 15 Football Division draw knives on each other,
which was described as a self -defence option— yes,
Mr. Speaker, under 15, who appear to have been
taught that violence is a first option.
The other instance that comes close to affec ting a student activity was when we had two young
men on a bike deliberately showing up at a w ellknown community sports club with a gun and opening
up, [shooting the gun] on unsuspecting patrons enjo ying themselves. Mr. Speaker, we all remember wor king men’s clubs being respected in our communities. And that sort of violent activity would not have been
tolerated.
Mr. Speaker, these shooting incidents are
happening much too often, and appear to be carried out by persons who mainly look like me. And I will
openly state that these acts are out of order and must
stop and be stopped by all means, by any means
necessary.
Mr. Speaker, violence is not new to us in
Bermuda. It has been with mankind since time imm emorial. However, this level of violence that we are now
experiencing is so unbelievable. I do understand that
some people still believe in an eye for an eye. But that
is, in my estimation, barbaric.
Mr. Speaker, as a former administrator in
football for many years, I can personally state that any issues on the football field were easily and quietly r esolved and settled as the players were walking off the
field, or over a drink on the sidelines, or in at a bar
before leaving for home. Mr. Speaker, I would hope and pray that we could get back to those days of lea ving football frustrations on the field, shake hands at the end of the play and, if time allows, have a beer
and celebrate life! This foolishness of violence has to
stop.

ROAD RAGE

Mr. Speaker, let me just
change gears here for a second and say that we have also noted high incidences of daily road rage that often es calates into verbal and sometimes physical exchanges between road users. I must say that in my
driving experiences these incidences are mostly
caused by cycle riders riding dangerously and using
what they now consider as their right to use the dreaded thir d lane. Mr. Speaker, that third lane on our
narrow roads is nothing but dangerous and really should be discouraged.
Mr. Speaker, I spoke on this floor some
months ago about road rage that I had seen and ex-perienced. Let me give a recent experience that I had
personally. I was attempting to enter the main road on
South Road from Rocklands where I live. And as is
my practice, I eased into position to turn left. In other
words, coming into town. I looked right. I looked left. I
looked right again before easi ng out. All looked clear
to me to enter the main road, and I quickly moved out.
Mr. Speaker, lo and behold, a bike rider came
up behind me blowing his horn and shouting at me. Now, because he must have been travelling at a high
speed, and that is just my estimation, I accidentally
came out in front of him, so, my bad. I realised my
mistake. I acknowledged him with a wave in my rear -
view mirror. I expected it all to be over. The rider
came up alongside of me gesturing and spouting
comments that I cannot repeat here, as it would be
unparliamentary language. I immediately apologised, but the rider shouted at me again and then rode off.
Mr. Speaker, I have intentionally taken the
pain of relating that experience of road rage for two reasons: One, I am hoping that our law -abiding road
users will learn from my experience and be extra cau-tious when attempting to enter onto the main road from blind or hidden driveways. The other reason is
just as important to me as the first, is to show how
behaviours, especially from a small group of our
youth, has changed and can quickly lead to violence, which could have happened in my instance. The rider
who looked, to me, younger than my youngest child
could have quickly noted that I was not one of his peer
group. He would hav e seen my grey beard and he
could have shown a little more respect to his elder.
Mr. Speaker, I see that as another unBermudian trait. And, Bermuda, we need to do better.
And hopefully we can do better. In fact, let me say that
with the news that we hear d today about Fairmont
Southampton . . . I would hope that some of these
young men can probably get jobs there. Maybe some of this antisocial behaviour can be reduced.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to end here and say
this propensity for violence, this increasi ng violence
and lack of respect is so not Bermuda; and it is not the
Bermuda that I was brought up in. Again, I am going
to encourage us to be a little kinder to each other. I do
not have all of the answers, Mr. Speaker, or solutions
to these things. I heard my colleague Brother [MP]
Caines say some things. And I certainly support that.
But, as I said, they concern me. But I will commit m yself, as a Member of this Honourable House to be a
part of the solution.
I got that off my chest, Mr. Speaker. Thank
you for your time.

Mr. Speaker, let me follow
on from Honourable Wayne Caines, and Honourable
Neville Tyrrell.
I applaud MP Caines in doing what he has to
do, not as a politician, not as a CEO, but as a B lack
man in a Black community showing leadership.
Mr. Speaker, I grew up on the other side of
Deepdale, Pond Hill . And not far from the homestead
of which my father was born, five minutes’ drive either
way, I could count at least 10 different murder spots
where young men—men younger than me—have
been murdered. And some of the men were from the
community, and some of the men were not from the
community. Irrespective, Bermuda is one community.
And often it is said that politicians [INAUD IBLE] not every singl e time because he was a faithful
Sabbath keeper . But many times when I called him to
come out and help me with some of these young men, with community clean- ups to be proactive in engaging
with them, he was right there by my side. Two of
these young men co me from Deepdale, or they come
from Devonshire, but they live in Deepdale. And two of these young men are (how can I say it ) always e xcited to see MP Caines because he sits down with
them, and he keeps it real with the challenges we face
as Black men in th is country.
Moving on to MP Tyrrell . I am ashamed that
he had to experience that. But this is the reality in the
Bermuda in which we live. And all we can do is be kinder to each other whether it is being in this House
or taking young men under our wings , as he has done
with me , and showing them the way, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, let me move on to another subject. There is a saying, one monkey don’t stop the ci rcus, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have sat down over the last
year and heard endless questions be ing asked: What
is up with Fairmont Southampton? When is this deal
going to close? We know it is important to the economy. Whether it is the civic groups, business groups,
unioni sed groups —they have all made it crystal clear
how important this is to the ec onomy, not just the
economy as a macro. But it is important to get our
people, our Black Bermudian men, back to work.
Mr. Speaker, it is not often that the OBA, the
BIU, the PLP, the BTA and other entities are on the
exact same page. And we have watched o ver the last
few weeks where each one of those entities have put
out statements saying how important it is to get the
Fairmont Southampton deal up and running. Today
the Honourable Premier brought a Statement to the
House to say that we are at the end of t he beginning.
The stage has been set for the construction to start and for the hotel to reopen, Mr. Speaker. Along the
way, hundreds of people will be working.
Now, I understand somebody who has 30
years of financial [experience] having due diligence or
need for due diligence. I understand. We all understand the country is in a precarious position because of failed —let me repeat that word, failed–– guarantees
by the OBA, Mr. Speaker. But I also understand there
are nearly 1,000 people out of work who worked at
Fairmont Southampton. We keep telling them, Well,
we are waiting for some more due diligence. That
does not put food on the table, Mr. Speaker. The construction industry needs a boost. This will do it, Mr.
Speaker.
And I am quite sure the Honourable P remier,
being the meticulous person that he is, will cross ev ery t and dot every i. So, I say to those who are on the
sidelines chirping, one monkey does not stop the ci rcus, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to move on. Through
technology I am able to speak in your House from the
Island of Jamaica. Mr. Speaker, a few days ago peo-ple who happened to be called “royal” happened to be
in Jamaica and they got with up a big speech saying,
Oh, slavery was abhorrent ( whatever the word is).
Slavery was bad. I w ish it never happened. Now it is
time to move on.
Mr. Speaker, that person follows the trait of
the father who said the same thing a few months ago in Barbados . And that father followed the trait of his
former Prime Minister, David Cameron, who said the
same thing in 2015. The irony, Mr. Speaker is that the
children of those who were enslaved will never see a
dime from the British Government, will never see a
dime from the French Government, will never see a
dime from the Spanish Government and they will ne ver see a dime from the Dutch Government.
But guess what, Mr. Speaker? People in
Ukraine who are fleeing from another dictator are now
getting a lot of money from those same countries.
What is the distinct difference, Mr. Speaker? Did we
1228 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly not have 400 years of subjugation of people invading
us and burning down our houses? Did we not have
our civilians killed by our oppressor? It is the same
thing, Mr. Speaker. But yet, we are never going to see
a dime. Why is that, Mr. Speaker? I think we know the answer.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to close here and say
to the Honourable House —both sides —thank you for
supporting the Fairmont Southampton Princess because 800 workers are going to be employed and
one
4monkey cannot stop the show.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Deputy Speaker.

GANG VIOLENCE INCREASING
Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am going [where] MP Caines ,
MP Tyrrell , and MP Famous were, on gang violence.
We probably need . . . not probably ; I think we need a
commission of inquiry into gang viol ence. And I think
we should ask the chief occupant of the largest house
on Langton Hill to appoint a commission of inquiry and
for the UK to foot the bill. And the reason why I say
that (for the UK to foot the bill) is because it is my
opinion that they ar e responsible for the stage we are
at in gang violence.
Let me repeat and let me remind people that it
was in 2008 that the then Premier, Dr. Brown, went to
Government House on two separate occasions and asked for assistance, and he was turned down. I wil l
repeat this again to you. They can call it whatever
they want. If it was another segment of this country
killing each other, we would have had that assistance.
That commission would have been granted. So, I am
asking that the Governor appoint a commission of i nquiry into gang violence and for the UK to pay for it.

FAIRMONT SOUTHAMPTON HOTEL
REDEVELOPMENT

Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: On the Southampton
Princess deal, I support the Premier in getting this
deal across the line with Southampton Princess. O ne
would have you think that the Premier stood by hi mself. He has a legal team there, a financial team to

4 See Speaker ’s comments at page 1243 see that all the i’s and t’s and all that are crossed and
dotted. So, I applaud them.
Mr. Speaker, it has been too long that this
deal has not been s olved. I think it [has been] almost
two years. When we talk about a hotel, that has
rough ly about 25 per cent of the country's beds, hotel
close d . . . Not only that, Mr. Speaker. We have 700plus workers that are normally employed at Sout hampton Princess, and I think it would be more than
normal because they will have other amenities there to be staffed, Mr. Speaker.
Not only that, Mr. Speaker. When we look at
the benefits to this country for Southampton Pri ncess—we have Bermudian entertainers, taxi drivers, ferry service workers, buses, tour boats , restaurants,
our farmers, local wholesalers, rental agencies, and the list goes on, that will benefit from the Princess b eing opened .
Let me say this, Mr. Speaker. In negotiations,
you never get all that you w ant. But you must get
something that is workable. In my honest opinion, I
believe that we will get something that we never got
before. And as far as concessions, Mr. Speaker, we are in a competition. We are in a competition. We
have some countries giving 25 -year concessions. We
are going to increase it around 10 to 15, Mr. Speaker.
People seem to think that there are investors
lined up to come to Bermuda to invest in a hotel. That
is not so. And, Mr. Speaker, when we have someone
who wants to invest over $ 200 million in Southampton
Princess to make it a continued five star-plus hotel,
we have to take that on. And I am not saying take it on at any cost. I know the Premier would not do that. No.
So, Mr. Speaker, when we look at other arrangements that have been made with two other ho-tels—some of these hotels have work permits, carte
blanche, just work permits, not even categories desi gnated. I do not think this is going to happen with the Southampton P project, Mr. Speaker.
So, I applaud the Premier and his team for
bringing this one across the line because you can hold
out all you want to say , I want all this. I want this and
that. Again, in negotiations, you very seldom get
100 per cent of what you want. And you have to be
reminded, when you are at the negotiating table, you
are not there by yourself. There are two teams. So, one has to . . . you are juggling.
So, that project, that Southampton P has no
comparison to Morgan’s Point. With Morgan’s Point you had nothing, and they were given a $150- plus
million guarantee. There was nothing there. Princess has a hotel there, property in excess of value of pro bably $250 million. There is an asset already there and
we have peak investors that want to improve it. Yes.
So, Mr. Speaker, I applaud it because very
shortly we are going to have at least 700, probably
600 people up there working to bring it into the shape
that it is proposed. And also, when it is finished it will have its 700- plus workers and all the amenities that


Bermuda House of Assembly have to be serviced and all the ot her agencies (when I
say agencies —taxi drivers and everybody else) that
will benefit from [the hotel] .
Just imagine if that hotel stayed closed for
another year. Can you imagine the financial assi stance that we would have to pay? We would have to
borrow m oney to pay these people. We would be
short of payroll tax. [With the renovation] w e will be
getting payroll tax. So, there are some revenues; there are some benefits to the Government and consequently to the people of Bermuda, Mr. Speaker. So, there is no time to be critici sing the Premier and the
Government for this deal.
As the Premier has said already, everything
will be presented to the public. There is nothing done under the table. And again, it is not the Premier neg otiating by himself. He has a team that advises him. So, I applaud the team and I applaud the Premier for
bringing this one, again, across the line.
Thank you, Mr. Premier, and congratulations
to the team. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it would be hard
for me not to speak on the issue of gang violence,
much like MP Caines and MP Tyrrell and MP Famous.
You know, we have been in the midst of this
scourge for now almost 15 , 16 years since the murders picked up. I was reminded when MP Famous
spoke about looking around in Friswell’s Hill and he
could count 10 spots where either shootings or murders took place, Mr. Speaker . And I concur , because
he was raised in Friswell’s Hill and I was down in Pig’s
Field behind St. Monica’s Mission. And when I was
elected as the MP for the area, Mr. Speaker, I was shell-shocked, because the shootings and murders
started right around the same time. I came here in
2009. The murders started in 2007 , 2008.
I remember one time sitting up, after about the
third or fourth murder in about four or five months ,
sitting up St. Monica’s. The police wanted to talk. The news reporters wanted to ask questions. And I was walking around, just trying to get away , Mr. Speaker,
trying to collect my thoughts. And no matter which
way I walked, I walked into a church.
And it just hit me. You know what I’m saying?
It was bigger . . . I said these incidents were bigger
than the politicians, bigger than the police. And much
like what my colleagues before me said this evening,
it is a community issue. So, I remember getting the
churches together, and one of the benefits of it was
they were not all of the same denomination. And we called it One Communi ty Unif ied. Unfortunately , over
the years it has kind of died off. And I am hoping that,
with the energy and impetus of what I am hearing
from my colleagues, we can revisit it because of what
MP Caines has done on One Way Deepdale is co mmendable. You know like, we have to go where the
problems are, the issues are. You know? And wha tever it takes we need to do it, Mr. Speaker.
A lot of times when we talk about gang vi olence, there is a side conversation as to what com-pensation the Gang Violence [Reduction] C oordinators are receiving. In my humble opinion, Mr. Speaker,
they are not receiving enough. Their job, led by Bis hop Bean and his team, is not for public consumption.
They work where nobody else goes. They are behind
these scenes. They need a bigger team. They need
resources. We have to go beyond lip service, Mr. Speaker. You know, we want things fixed. We want
things corrected. A lot of us, though, want to know
how it is fixed and corrected.
We need some people to get down and dirty,
Mr. Speaker. Yes, help those who want jobs to get
jobs. Help those who want to get high school diplomas
to get high school diplomas. You know, we have to
help those families that are afraid to speak up. B ecause when, like most of us . . . because this is not
just a Pembroke i ssue. Most of us are only doing
doorstep canvassing. You hear these horror stories
about what is happening in the neighbourhoods and
what people know, but they can’t speak about it b ecause of fear. We need to address all of that, Mr.
Speaker.
You know, MP Burgess said earlier about
what the former Premier had done. Somebody should be held accountable for that because as long as it is
not in certain neighbourhoods, it is fine. I am saying
that to say, Mr. Speaker, as an aside I remember in
2011, maybe 2012, there was a shooting at the foot of
Trimingham Hill at the roundabout. I do not know if
you may or may not remember, Mr. Speaker. There were some guys that were working for Parks, and they
were in the middle of the roundabout, cutting the
grass and fixing up the roundabout, as is normally
done.
Why I am bringing this up is because the person that they tried to get, escaped. I got a call as an
MP from some people who do not look like us, some
Front Street business[men], and they wanted to have
1230 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report
B ermuda House of Assembly a meeting wi th me. And I met with them, and we had a
frank conversation, Mr. Speaker. And I will tell you
how the conversation went. One of the guys told me,
he said, Look, Minister (at the time) Weeks. As long
as there are shootings in Back of Town (and he was
honest and frank ), we were fine. But when that shooting happened the other day, he said, on Trimingham
Hill, that brought it close to home. So, they had offered to do whatever was necessary to help us ad-dress the increase in crime and shootings and mur-ders.
Fortunately, Mr. Speaker . . . actually as I am
talking, I remember it was in 2012 because as we
were having further follow -up meetings to see what
could be done, there was an election, and we lost the
election. And hence, those talks went by the wayside. So, there are some people on the other side of town
that are willing to help.
We might shake the trees, Mr. Speaker, and
get everybody involved —those who look like me and
those who do not look like me. This is a Bermuda problem. Sometimes when we talk about community, we think about the Black community, but this is a Bermuda problem. Front Street , Court Street , Middletown, Tucker’s Town— nobody is going to escape
the scourge. So, we have to appeal to others that do not look like us who may have the funds and the r esources to help out.
Do not wait until it comes to your back door,
Mr. Speaker. You know, there are those of us who are
not only MPs in those areas, we live and come from
those areas. I can tell a story just like what MP Tyrrell
just said about road rage, but I am not going to waste
your time, Mr. Speaker. Because what the MP said
was definitely an example of what I also have exper ienced. And it just leaves you with your mouth open.
And the more you apologise, the more disrespect is thrown at you.
So, our community is on fire—on fire , spiritually. You know, some things need to be addressed. We have to reach out. We have to get together, roll up our
sleeves, Mr. Speaker. You know, some things that we
have to do are not going to be pretty . But if we want to
take back our neighbourhoods one street corner at a time, we are going to do that. You know, if we are s erious, we have to come together regardless of our complexion or our denomination or our political m otive. We have to come together to save our country, Mr. Speaker.
And with that, I will say thank you. Have a
great evening, Mr. Speaker.

Okay. Well, Mr. Speaker,
for me this has been a, I want to say, very interesting
parliamentary session. And I want to thank all of my
colleagues for making it that way.
From my perspective the session started with
what I would call a bang. And that was with the notice
to all of us that the Honourable Curtis Dickinson had resigned as the Minister of Finance. And, interestingly enough, it ended on that same note today when he
spoke and gave us some more details and some more
comments in terms of why he resigned.
In between that time, I would say that for me, I
spent the most time examining the Budget, looking at the Budget Statements, looking at the Budget Reply
and all those kinds of things to make sure I was pretty
much informed. And one of the lessons learned for
sure also was with respect to the overall Government
guarantees in that when I first saw the guarantee for
the Hospitals Board I was like, hey, what is happening
there? But when I checked into it , like everyone else, I
found out the reasons why. And I am saying all of this
because the budget process is actually a unique time
to learn about different things if we take the time to do so.
Before I continue on, I will give you a short
story. You all know that I am an accountant and I have
been trained for about 30 years or whatever the case
may be. One day when I worked for Government and I was in a meeting with the PS for Public Works and I
made the comment, What sense does it make to build
a bus shelter when only one or two people are going
to use it? And the response was, Well, Anthony, you
do not understand. Because the one or two people
who use that bus shelter need to have shelter if it is raining or just generally bad weather or to keep them safe while they are waiting for the bus .
So, what is the point? The point is that in
some cases, certainly in the political arena, the pure consideration of finance is not the basis upon which decisions can be made. Sometimes we have to be more practical. So, lessons learned.
First off, as we all know, the PLP went to the
polls, and they had a platform. And the Premier always reminds us that the platform is probably one of
the most critical documents because that is the basis upon which the electorate cast their vote, and they expect you to deliver on what you promised. So, prom ises have been made, and now we must move
forward to deliver on those promises.
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1231

Bermuda House of Assembly One of the biggest things was to ensure that
we are able to create opportunity. And in terms of opportunity, there must be some level of hope. And
clearly , what the Premier announced today does d eliver that hope to at least 600 people and probably
(600 times three), maybe almost 2,000 people on the
basis that each of those workers is more than likely
going to have a family that will then appreciate that
mommy, daddy, partner, whoever they are, are now
able to bring home funds to cover the needs. And that then creates hope. And just imagine, Mr. Speaker, the impact that has on younger children, for example,
whose parents might not be working right now, and
they c annot get what they need. And now, once the
hotel gets up and running, the parents are able to go
ahead to work and start to provide what those children
need. So, that is a significant impact of the proposed
renovations at the hotel.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I, l ike many others, do not
know any of the details, but I continue to be hopeful, excited and waiting with anticipation to find out those details. Because what we do know so far is that the
Premier talked about the fact that there will be an o pportunity for B ermudians to invest in the project. Now,
that is exciting in and of itself. The next thing, though,
is we need to be prepared to actually respond to the
opportunity to invest. And thereafter be able to partic ipate in what we all expect to be the success of the
new Fairmont Southampton. We cannot sit back and grumble and complain and let the opportunity pass us
by because that , of course, would not make any real
sense.
Mr. Speaker, I also look forward to the details
around the guarantee. One of the lessons I learned
during this whole process was to take more time and
understand the details. And what I mean by that was that there were many comments made about Morgan’s Point, and then there started to be comments in
terms of Morgan’s Point versus the Fairmont S outhampton. The Premier has been very clear that the Morgan’s Point project —and then the guarantee— was
fundamentally wrong because the Government ult imately guaranteed the entire project. Based upon that
understanding and explanation, based upon that basic
level of, I want to say, trust in the Premier in his role as Premier and Minister of Finance, based upon the knowledge that those who owned Fairmont Hampton
also owned Tucker’s Point and they have made a
good run at that, based upon the fact there is a si gnificant and continuing team of civil servants who have provided assistance, based upon the fact that there
are numerous financial professionals that are part of the process, and, indeed, based upon the fact that the
Honourable Curtis Dickinson laid the f oundation for
the negotiations, to me all of those things add up as a
good series of circumstances and encourage me again to look forward to those details. Clearly, some
things might have adjusted, but again, knowing on balance all of those who were involv ed, I look forward
to what is a good outcome.
I will also say, Mr. Speaker, that a lesson I
learned a long time ago, indeed, during negotiations,
is that the best agreement is an agreement where no one is completely happy. And so, we know based upon the public statements that the negotiations took
quite a while. They have been going on for several
months and given that it did not happen very quickly,
clearly, each side would have done their best to get
their best deal for themselves. And so, I come back to the fact that I look forward to having the discussion in
the House when we actually go through some of the
details once that is brought to the House.
I will underscore what has been said, by, I
think, it was MP Famous a little earlier that I have also
been excited because I have had opportunity to speak
to MP Cole Simons in his role as Opposition Leader
and Shadow Minister of Finance, and he has asserted
that he supports the Government in principle. Yes,
again, details need to be forthcoming. I spoke to Mr.
Chris Furbert in his capacity as the President of the
BIU. He also asserts his support . And I have spoken
to many people in the community, actually, in terms of
those who will potentially provide services to the hotel
and others. They, too, are excited. So, I just look forward again . . . I know I am repeating myself because
I want to emphasise the fact that I am excited. That is
the word, I am excited because we are now able to
look forward with increased hope. I think the Premier
said that the deal will be sorted out or finalised in the
next month, and so, we can look forward to what will transpire at that stage.
Mr. Speaker, I will also declare my interest in
terms of I do work in the hospitality sector, and I am
engaged in many opportunities with people who can
share their experiences with us, having come to Ber-muda. And I can tell you that they are excited to come
to Bermuda. They, too, look forward to what will ha ppen as we move forward, because it will give them a
chance to come back to Bermuda, bring their friends,
bring their families and experience what is Bermuda’s
natural beauty in terms of our physical surroundings,
but also t o experience our people, because, Mr.
Speaker, as you know, we are a unique people. Our mannerisms, our natural friendliness is actually
unique, and it does leave a lasting impression on our
guests.
In that regard, Mr. Speaker, I will go back to
the fact that certainly, when I was coming through,
working in the hotels was actually one of those rites of passage. And so, during the summertime you worked
what I want to call crazy hours, but you were able to
interact with our guests, and it gave you a different
level of appreciation of providing service.
I have said before that service and servitude
are very different things . So let’s not get confused with
those two. But certainly, as you went through that rite
of passage, you learned what it was to provide ser1232 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly vice, what is expected, and as long as those persons
received what they considered to be value for money
or a valuable ser vice, they did not mind paying. And
we have to get back to that also, Mr. Speaker , get to
know that people are paying relatively high prices to come to Bermuda and they do not mind if they perceive that they have gotten good value for money.
Mr. Speaker, another lesson that I learned r eally at the behest of the Honourable Curtis Dickinson was when he spoke about the idea of “negative carry ”
some time ago, because Bermuda had been borro wing money for quite a while in order to ensure there were funds to put i nto the S inking Fund. And he explained it in terms of negative carry, meaning that you
are borrowing money to put aside to pay debt , but you
are paying interest on that actual money which did not
make any sense or was not practical. But that is now
where I go back to the idea of the bus shelter, that
sometimes the pure financial consideration is not the
overriding factor. And in this instance in terms of the
Sinking Fund, the lesson learned is that even though it
is actually correct that you are borrowing m oney to put
aside and it is costing you money, it does create that level of discipline.
And so, as we go forward, I am looking forward to the Premier in his role as Minister of Finance in terms of how we are going to make some adjus tments to ensure Bermuda gets back on the, what I
want to call now, the road to recovery.
Mr. Speaker, there is clearly lots of work to be
done, and to go back to my continuing analogy about being on a boat, or [it is damaged by] the dock and
the boat develops a leak, we are go ing to require all
hands on deck. And if I reflect on some of the co mments made today, I think more and more of us are
understanding that. And I am looking forward to us
really getting together, and it may be that the project
of the Fairmont Southampton is going to be that co ncrete example where we come together, and yes, we will examine it in detail and we will have some conversations about that, but ultimately, [it will be] where we
fully support what is going on.
And by doing so, Mr. Speaker, it will set the
correct tone for the community in that they will realise
that the leaders of the country are able to work t ogether for the common good, and then they, too, will
follow on in doing so. And some may not understand,
but that sense of leading together for the greater
common good will have an impact on what was talked
about earlier about the increasing violence in the
community. And so, we as leaders can set the tone
and the positive fallout will be a reduced level of vi olence in the community.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to make one or two
further comments before I close, and one of those is that there is the developing narrative, I want to say, sometimes repeated, which I think has no substance,
and that is that the PLP are responsible for so much of Bermuda’s current ills because they have been the
Government for 20 of the past 25 years.
Now, that actual statement is factual. However, Mr. Speaker, for those that keep on saying that,
they need to remember what about the other 375 years? The PLP and the philosophy of the PLP was
not responsible for the foundations of Bermuda in its
current context. And so, to keep on saying that the
PLP has been in Government for the past 20 of 25
years with the intention of saying that we are responsible for everything now, actually makes no sense. And I, Mr. Speaker, will say now that I will push back
every time someone says that because, clearly, they
are not being completely honest with themselves and
the general public.
Mr. Speaker, I will also say going back to the
actual proposed Southampton Princess that I am look-ing forward to it also because the Premier has indicated that there is going to be the ability of a Bermuda
Trust Fund to be involved which would allow for some
of the funds of the success of the hotel to be put into
the Trust Fund. And ultimately, I want to say I am ex-cited because the proposed plan appears to reflect
what I think has been missing in the past, and that is
that if the Government puts in place guarantees and
concessions, it is going to reduce the risk of the pr oject, and as a reward the Government or us as the people of Bermuda should benefit in the future suc-cess. And so, to the extent that the agreement allows
for the Government and us as Bermuda to participate
in the future success, that is act ually a tremendous
achievement. A tremendous achievement! And we
should all applaud that. And to the extent that we do
not understand, let’s ask questions so they can be
answered, but that is truly a significant, significant
achievement, and I look forward to those details.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to close with another
short story that is this: I had a cousin and they wanted
to buy a bike. [They] did not have the funds and could not go to the bank. They asked their family and for
whatever reason the family said, No, we don’t think
so, because it is too much of a risk. Thankfully, I was
in a position whereby I could assist, and I did so, on
the basis that I wanted to ensure that my cousin was
able to understand what it was to be responsible and to repay the debt.
And so, against the backdrop of others in that
person’s family actually telling me not to do it, I did it. The success was that they went through, they were
consistent with their payments, and therefore, they
understood the need to be responsible. T his was
many years ago now, and they have been responsible
since then.
The reason I said that is because sometimes,
as I said earlier, the pure financial considerations are not the basis upon which a decision is made. There
are other factors that have to factor into it in order to
ensure that the ultimate decision is made that is correct. And in this instance, I will say it one more time, I
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1233

Bermuda House of Assembly am looking forward to the details because getting the
Southampton Princess back on track means, based
upon the Premier ’s estimate, 600 jobs during construction and prob ably 800 to 1,000 after construction,
because, clearly, you can have all the persons that work in a hotel but there are also going to be those
that have to do the rest of the management team, for
example.
So, let’s look forward to the idea of there being as many as 600 jobs starting soon for the life of
the actual project, and then those who are going to be working in the hotel once it opens up again. And even
more important than that, to be honest, it is the
demonstration that Bermuda is now open again. It is
going to have the trickle- down effect of more airlift
and, ideally, we will also understand, Mr. Speaker,
that those persons who are investing these amounts
of money clearly see Bermuda in a positive light, and
let that then encourages us all to have a much more
positive outlook for Bermuda and to, I want to say i gnore—

Thank you.
So again, I will just end by saying I am exci ted, and I want all of Bermuda to get excited also as
we look forward to what will be the future success of the Fairmont Southampton, and that we all have an opportunity to benefit directly and indirectly for what it
signifies for Bermuda. So, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MP, Minister Scott, rather.

PLP GOVERNMENT PROVIDING AN ENVIRO NMENT WHERE OPPORTUNITIES EXIST

Hon. W. Lawrence Scott: Yes, thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would just like to pick up right
where my colleague just left off talking about his excitement.
Now, I want to just start by saying that one
thing that I learned very early in life is that you cannot
control what others do to you. You cannot control
what others think about you, and you cannot control what others say about you. But you can control how
you r espond. And I learned this by being a goalkeeper, Mr. Speaker. I might not be able to [save] every shot. I might not be Aaron Ramsdale, but I do my job,
I do it well, and I do it to the best of my ability, and I do
not let, when I get scored on, affect how I handle the
next play.
And Mr. Speaker, I share that in the context of
not just with my athletic prowess that I have acquired
over many years of non -competitive, recreational,
non-professional . . . semi -professional athletics, but
Mr. Speaker, I share that in what this country has gone through over the last few years. We cannot control COVID -19. We obviously cannot control what is
going on in the Ukraine. All of these things or these
two major geopolitical and global events have had a
significant impact on Bermuda. But what we can control is how we respond. And this Government has r esponded in a manner that has gotten the world’s attention.
I will start with COVID -19, for an instance. We
became the template that other, I will even say, G8
nations follow ed. We had a template that others envied. People looked at us as the gold standard and
that is due to the way that this Government handled
adverse situations, how this Government took control
of what they could and did not really assert themselves or worry too much about what they could not
[control]. And so, Mr. Speaker, now that we are star ting to move beyond the pandemic, learning to live with
the pandemic or learning to safely live with the pa ndemic, Mr. Speaker, I think that it goes without saying
although Bermuda is an Island and we are several
hundred miles at sea and we may be another world,
Mr. Speaker, we are not isolated. We are not insulat-ed nor are we immune to global threats, to global
events and to things that happen beyond our border.
And whilst there are other countries that have
direct control of sanctions, have direct control of manufacturing and manufacturing levels and the like, we
do not. And so, Mr. Speaker, what you have seen is
this Government focus on its core. And the core is its people. We as a collective body —that would be the
Premier, the Cabinet, the caucus and the legislative
body —have protected our people as best as we can
to weather the storm.
So, Mr. Speaker, I am excited today, not just
because of what the Premier was able to announce
with the Fairmont deal and I declare my interest —
more hotel beds mean it is easier for us to inspire and motivate our traditional airlines to add seat capacity.
But keep in mind that no matter what, at the height of
our tourism boom we represent (“we” being Bermuda)
0.1 per cent of their seat capacity.
However, there have been questions, mainly
by the Opposition. What is this PLP Government going to do to make Bermuda attractive? How is this
PLP Government going to make Bermuda attractive?
Is Bermuda still attractive to outward- inward inves tment, meaning do people believe in Bermuda’s
strength? Do people believe in Bermuda as a money -
making jurisdiction? And Mr. Speaker, we have the
1234 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly answer today, not just in Fairmont Southampton, but
what I was able to announce is, although limited, that
there is an application for an airline to be based here
in Bermuda, keeping in mind that they are looking to
base two planes here with each plane being worth
$100 million.
And it does not end there, because we are
aware of a second air service provider that is now i nterested in basing aircraft here in Bermuda, with the
proposed aircraft that they are looking to use being
worth $20 [million] to $30 million. We are also aware that the airline that has submitted an application has
already started hiring, has already advertised for Bermudian jobs and Bermudians to be at the forefront.
And I am also aware that more job applications are on the way. Mr. Speaker, it does not stop there!
We are also aware from the Transportation
Ministry of cruise partners that are looking to and have
expressed an interest in investing in Bermuda, in looking at upgrading our tourism infrastructure, our transportation infrastructure so that they can look to i ncrease or strengthen their part nership with Bermuda.
Mr. Speaker, you would be aware that any i nvestment in infrastructure means investment in co nstruction, which means investment in new job creation. And Mr. Speaker, I know a spoke a little while
ago about what it takes for a government to create an environment where job creation is favourable. That is
what we have been focused on, that is what you are
seeing now. It is now more than just green shoots.
You are now starting to see the roots and even the
fruits of this Government’s hard work. And so, anyone
who questions whether Bermuda is still a place that
people are looking at to invest in, the answer is yes, you have that.
And now, Mr. Speaker, it can even go further
because what we are doing now, we are looking at
airlines being based in Bermuda, increased inves tment from cruise partners, hotel development, job creation, career creation, Mr. Speaker. Looking right
now at the Honourable Member and my colleague
who just took his seat, [he] talked about the hospitality
industry. Aviation is an extension, and this is my def inition, aviation is an extension of hospitality.
I worked for an airline whose slogan at the
time was Returning Hospitality Back to A ir Travel . And
so, Mr. Speaker, this Government has not just only
seen us through and guided us through COVID -19,
this Government has actually used that setback of
COVID -19 as a setup for a comeback. And Mr.
Speaker, it is not just the Ministry of Transportation that has had successes. You have seen successes in the Ministry of Economy and Labour. You have seen
successes . . . I do not have enough time to talk about
the successes that the Ministry of Health has had, that the Ministry of National Security has had. Every Mini stry has had its success if not multiple successes over
the course of the last two years, Mr. Speaker. And so, therefore, the world is watching. And
the world is now seeing that we are just as viable as
anywhere else. And they are looking to not just set up
bases here. They want to trade with us, Mr. Speaker.
They want us to be a part of their distribution routes.
So, the more places, the more times, the more juri sdictions that we can connect to Bermuda, it is called
connecting the dots. The more dots that we connect,
the greater our network, the stronger our network, the
possibility and the likelihood of finding a way, a combination that can help lower the cost of living in some
way, shape or form is more likely.
Mr. Speaker, I am excited because I believe
that this is not just a one- off announcement of inves tment, of job creation, of new career developments. I
believe that this a trend. And you will start to see a
trend of just positive news. Look at what has hap-pened recently where, although we may not be ins ulated from the increase in gas prices, we are able to
do something that can help reduce or keep the price
as low as practical for as long as possible.
So, you see and I am hoping that I am painting that picture that we cannot control what happens to us, but we can control how we respond. And we are
responding in a wa y that our credit ratings are not being downgraded. We are responding in a way where unemployment numbers should be going down in the
future. We are responding in a way that provides an environment where job creation, entrepreneurship and
small business ow nership is favourable, Mr. Speaker.
We are providing an environment where o pportunities that did not exist when I was young . . . and
I am not that old, Mr. Speaker. Opportunities that did not exist just two, three decades ago exist now. Mr.
Speaker. What I would not give . . . and I am being a
bit biased, what I would not have given to have been
able to have a career in aviation and be based here in
Bermuda. To be able, instead of having to take those
red-eye flights and do those maintenance flights and
all of that and then ending up in crash pads and hotels
. . . Mr. Speaker, it is amazing what is going on!
So, I pause right now because it is so easy to
get caught up in the negativity that is going on. It is so
easy to point fingers and say, Government, w hat are
you doing? It is so easy to say, Government why
aren’t you doing this? Why did you not do that earlier
or sooner? But Mr. Speaker, let’s see how many people will be just as quick to highlight these green
shoots, these roots and these fruits that ar e coming
and have appeared based over the hard work of this PLP Government.
Mr. Speaker, I do not want to take up too
much time, but I will reiterate that I would not be surprised that if in the future, and possibly the nearer f uture than not, you [will be ] hearing more announc ements about not just small investments but hundreds
of millions of dollars’ worth of investment in this cou ntry where you might be able to . . . I would not be surprised if we were to start to see job opportunities for
Official Hansar d Report 25 March 2022 1235

Bermuda House of Assembly hundreds of Bermudians at a time coming down the
pipeline. And I would not be surprised if more companies, more services and possibly stronger networks
between not just Bermuda where we start to do more
business with more jurisdictions that have individuals that look more like us and share our cultural dynamics
and share our history.
And with that, Mr. Speaker, once again, this
Government has taken a setback and turned it into a setup for a comeback.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister of Education, you have the
floor.

FAIRMONT SOUTHAMPTON HOTEL
REDEVELOPMENT

Hon. Diallo V. S. Rabain: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, governing is about philosophies,
philosophies of what you consider to be important and
sometimes it has to be more than just dollars and
cents. That is an important part of governing, Mr. Speaker, but it is not the most important part of go verning. The im portant part of governing is making decisions that are in the best interests of the citizens of the country in which you are governing.
Earlier today, the Honourable Premier made
an announcement about moving forward with the
Fairmont Southampton Hotel, Mr . Speaker. It is a
momentous moment. It is a slog that has taken mult iple years to get to, and we are finally seeing the light
at the end of the tunnel. Is the deal perfect? I believe I
can go back to my colleague MP Burgess who said,
Very few deals are perfect. It is all about give and take.
When we are talking about developments in
Bermuda, especially in the hospitality area, there is a
certain level of risk that you have to be willing to put
up [with] that may not make sense in the very begi nning, but y ou have to weigh that against the positives
that can come out of it. This is the largest hotel in
Bermuda. It employs the most people in Bermuda.
And getting a deal done for Fairmont Southampton
was something that we simply had to put on the table
and cons ider any and everything to make sure that we
get something for which we can hold our heads high
and say, This is the best thing for Bermuda . And I b elieve we have made it that far when I look at the d etails of that particular deal.
Kudos to the Minister of Finance and Premier
and his team who diligently worked hours and hours
per day. I know in talking to him . . . I would reach out to him and ask him, Are you okay? because of the
amount of time put into this. Trust me, Bermudian public. We have put somethi ng together that you will
be proud of. We have learned from the mistakes of Morgan’s Point and the airport . We know what the
pitfalls can be. And we have done everything within
our power to avoid that. We believe that we have
something in hand that can get us to the Promised
Land with minimal pain.
However, there has to be some pain, and
there will be some pain. And we just have to come to
grips with the fact that when we put deals like this t ogether it is not going to be perfect. And it is not going
to always be rosy, as some of us would like. And it is
unfortunate that some of us are not able to see that
and they keep looking for other things. But we are g oing to make it there, Mr. Speaker. I have every conf idence that this hotel will open in 2023. It wil l employ
the 600, 700 persons that were previously there. And
it will be a renaissance of us coming out of the
COVID -19 nightmare that we are in the process of
emerging from.
So, with that, Mr. Speaker, I just want to put
my full support behind the Premier and Minister of
Finance for what he has done in moving us forward.
Understand that at the end of the day it is a collective
decision by the Cabinet and by the Progressive La-bour Party. And we will forge ahead and get the job done and get our people back t o work.
It bodes very well with our education plan.
And we are talking about adding a signature school specifically for hospitality and those fields. It is perfect
that if we are able to open a third signature school in
the coming years that is focused on hospitality, we
now have a hotel that is being built and properly put in place to take on these students as we look to ensure
that our high school students not only go to school to
learn what they do in a classroom, but [what] the r equirements will be . . . And when we look at our gra duation requirements , all of those students, whether
they pick a minor or major in the signatures, will leave
with experience in those fields, meaning that they will
be working with professionals. There will be inter nships. They will be doing courses away from school. They will get all of that knowledge. It only makes sense for us to look at what our hospitality would look
like while moving forward. And with this coming to fruition, it is a perfect time for us to start talking to those
partners even more than we have been talking to
them all of this time.
Mr. Speaker, I now want to shift to something
else. I started by saying it is about priorities , it is about
the philosophy of the Government. And, Mr. Speaker,
the philosophy of this Government , and I am quoting
my colleague who just spoke before me, MP Scott, is
that we choose to focus on the people. We choose to
give the people tools so they can better themselves
and make a better life for themselves in Bermuda.
1236 25 March 2022 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of Assembly Early on, we heard the arguments when we
were discussing the Cannabis Bill. I listened in on the
Senate yesterday, and [they] were talking about the
pension Bill, and I found the difference in philosophy
to be stark —to be truly stark.
One example given yesterday in t he other
place was: What if someone takes out $6,000 and
because there is no schooling or any sort of education
put in place they go and buy a bike. Why would they
want to buy a bike? They should be put into classes
that say, This is not what you should be buying with
your pension money . But, Mr. Speaker, what if they
need a bike to get to their employment so they can
make more money to put into their pension fund? See,
this is what I mean when I talk about the difference in philosophy and thinking. If you have not walked in
those shoes, Mr. Speaker, if you have not represented
and walked in constituencies where people cannot get
to work, that is the type of conversations you have
amongst yourselves.
When I spoke earlier in the same session,
when they said [there is an] economic impact on Bermuda caused by persons sending their children off to
boarding school , what about the economic impact of a
household that cannot go to work and make any money because they are now stuck at home looking after
their childre n because their children are in quarantine
because we are not wearing masks in school an ymore, and they have been exposed and have become positive? Mr. Speaker, it is about philosophies. It is
about the way we think. I am not saying that one is
more than t he other ; but what I am saying is that we
have to think of all sides and not just one when we
talk about decisions and making the decisions.
But this Government, Mr. Speaker . . . today I
was very happy to attend a photographic opportunity
where once again, in 2022, the Government of Bermuda was issuing funds to our Workmen’s Clubs and
other clubs in Bermuda for capital development and
monies from the [Consolidated Fund] . This happened
twice last year as well. These monies are used to i mprove the infrastruc ture of our clubs. And guess what
happens when we give money to improve infrastruc-ture? People go to work , because people are now
building, they are being constructive. And we are
providing opportunities for people to have jobs even if it may be for a shor t time. Something is better than
nothing. What do they say? A half a loaf is better than
no loaf.
So, when we look at that $175,000 that was
given out today, we look last year at the $223,000 that
was given out in one bout , and another $37,000 that
was gi ven out, these are real monies that are being
put to good use. And I bring that up, Mr. Speaker, because early on my colleagues were talking about the
violen ce situation that we have in Bermuda. And I do
believe that some of these things and some of these
clubs, which are neighbourhood clubs that have suffered just like everything else and have suffered vivid-ly since 2017 (and I will get to that, Mr. Speaker), we
are now providing them with avenues to become the
clubs in their neighbourhoods that can offer those
positive programmes for our children to attend, for our
elders to attend.
I declare my interest, Mr. Speaker, as an executive for Harrington Workmen’s Club. I long for the
days when we have that club back to where it was
before, where we had positiv e community events in
the upper hall, where we had the Christmas party for the neighbourhood children. We had the kite- making
for the neighbourhood children. We had the annual
Easter [egg] hunt and Good Friday things for the chi ldren, the back -to-school ev ents, the barbeques over
at Jobson’s Bay. Those are the types of things that our clubs were able to offer when they were up and
running and fully operational. And these types of
funds will not only help provide employment opport unities but they will help us get back to some of those
community events that are sorely lacking in our community.
Mr. Speaker, I was a member in that other
place, in the Senate, from 2011 to 2016. I was a Go vernment Senator, and I was the Opposition Leader in
the Senate. And I remember —