The SpeakerThe SpeakerMembers, the Minutes of the 20th September 2013 have been deferred. MESSAGES FROM THE GOVERNOR
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere are no messages from the Governor. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE SPEAKER OR MEMBER PRESIDING APOLO GY
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Honourable Member from Warwick West, constituency 28 (I believe) is not well, so will not be here, MP Je ff Sousa. MESSAGES FROM THE SENATE
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere are no messages from the Senate. PAPERS AND OTHER COMMUNICATIONS TO THE HO USE
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo papers and/or other communic ations to the House. PETITIONS
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo petitions . STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI now move to Statements by Ministers . I will recognise first the Honourable Minister for Public Safety. Minister Michael Dunkley, you have the floor. NEIGHBO URHOOD WATCH 2.0 Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Good morning, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGood morning. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Good morning, co lleagues. Mr. Speaker, I last provided an update on the initiative known as Neighbourhood Watch 2.0 to this Honourable House on the 113th of March of this year. As I st ated then, a strong community needs equally strong public participation …
Good morning. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Good morning, co lleagues. Mr. Speaker, I last provided an update on the initiative known as Neighbourhood Watch 2.0 to this Honourable House on the 113th of March of this year. As I st ated then, a strong community needs equally strong public participation so that it encourages the development of our youth, safer communities and healthier rel ationships. Mr. Speaker, as I outlined in the Speech from the Throne, a vibrant Neighbourhood Watch pr ogramme must be supported as Bermuda residents gravely commit to taking back their communities. Mr. Speaker, Neigh bourhood Watch 2.0 is designed to enhance the present Neighbourhood Watch pr ogramme by using technology to connect neighbours and their communities. Neighbourhood Watch 2.0 will notify residents via voice call and text messages. The smart use of technology is another best practice tool in the fight for safer communities. Mr. Speaker, as you are aware, Neighbourhood Watch is one of the most effective ways to r educe crime and build better relationships between res-idents of a specific area. It also encourages members of the communi ty to share the responsibility for the welfare and upkeep of their neighbourhoods. So, Mr. Speaker, on October 16 th of this year, the Ministry of Public Safety will officially launch the Neighbourhood Watch 2.0 initiative. And this event will highlight the power of cooperation between communi-ties, private business, public departments and the Government , working together to build a better Bermuda through technology. Mr. Speaker, our local vendor, Bermuda S ecurity Group, entered into a partnership with Village 1 Official Hansard Report , 13 March 2013, pages 675676 House of Assembly 2132 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Defence, thus aligning the Neighbourhood Watch 2.0 programme with international best practice stand ards. Village Defence has performed testing of the techno logy successfully. Mr. Speaker, with the assistance of the Bermuda Police Service, there will be four pilot communities, to include a mixture of Neighbourhood Watch groups and community action group. Each group will be sponsored by public or private partners for the year. So I am pleased to advise honourable col-leagues today that four communities are confirmed: And they are the Jennings Road, Convict Bay, Friswells Hill and George’s Bay Lane. Mr. Speaker, keeping Bermuda safe is not solely the responsibility of the police. Each member of our community can play a vital role by getting involved in the neighbourhood. Cooperation, participation and partnerships are paramount for the betterment of our community. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Minister for Public Works, Minister T. G. Moniz. You have the floor. KPM G INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMIT Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am making a Statement on the KPMG Infrastructure Summit , Miami, Florida. Mr. …
Thank you, Minister. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Minister for Public Works, Minister T. G. Moniz. You have the floor.
KPM G INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMIT
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am making a Statement on the KPMG Infrastructure Summit , Miami, Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to provide Honourable Members of this House with an update on the recent KPMG Infrastructure Summit that was held in Miami, Florida, from September 22nd to 24th. Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Premier led a delegation of Ministers, namely, the Honourable Shawn Crockwell, the Honour able Sylvan Richards and myself. We were also accompanied by six senior civil servants with expertise in the areas we were to discuss at this summit. The respective Ministers were responsible to take part in panel discussions or to answer questions from those in attendance on issues relating directly to their ministries. Thirteen Caribbean islands, as well as Panama, had strong representation at this summit. Other island leaders included Dr. the Honourable O rlando Smith, Premier and Finance Minister of the Brit-ish Virgin Islands; the Honourable Dr. Rufus Ewing, Premier and Mini ster of Tourism for Turks and Caicos Islands; and the Honourable Alden McLaughlin, Prem-ier of the Cayman I slands, among many Ministers of these same islands. Mr. Speaker, it is evident that the summit is becoming more popular, since the number of islands has more than doubled, from 6 in 2011 to 13 this year, and from 80 delegates to over 230. The confer ence brought together parties interested in publi c private partnerships relating to the procurement of infrastructure projects, from clients , law firms such as Fres h-fields , Davis LLP, and locally, Conyers Dill & Pea rman, as well as developers and inves tors. The hundreds of delegates were informed that there is potentially $57 trillion worth of infrastructure projects globally, and that the potential of infrastruc-ture projects in the countries represented amounted to some $17 billion. By the way, Mr. Speaker, the list of the delegates or attendees at the conference can be accessed on the KPMG website. From this, you can see that this is a very competitive market we are in, and therefore it is crit ically important that Bermuda be seen as a good place to invest. Mr. Speaker, our Premier was the first to tal k at the summit on one of the many panels discussing the importance of infrastructure projects in the islands. The Premier emphasised that the Government is working with transparency and integrity and is commi tted to working collaboratively with those who are wil ling to invest in infrastructure. The Premier also detailed how project deve lopment has become more streamlined under this Government with the setting up of the Economic D evelopment Committee [EDC], which was created, as the Premier emphasised, to cut down on the burea ucracy, thereby enabling projects to progress more quickly. Mr. Speaker, the concept of the EDC was praised by major developers later in the summit as an example that should be followed by others in the r egion. Bermuda also received pr aise during a later panel discussion for the ease with which the P3 co ntract for the KEMH Hospital had been set up. We were advised that this contract had been put together far more quickly than any in the United Kingdom would normally be. On the second day of the summit, Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to join a panel on stage in which the focus was on successful project manage-ment and keeping projects on time and on budget. Delegates were interested to hear the success that Bermuda has had in delivering the upgrade works to the Heritage Wharf to accommodate the new Breakaway cruise ship. And before the summit concluded, Bermuda delivered a very comprehensive and i mpressive presentation on the proposed new airport and the new crossings bridge, which was very well received by the delegates. Mr. Speaker, I can report that by attending the summit Bermuda has been put in a very positive pos ition, and there were many positive comments from delegates about how things are done in Bermuda. In addition, the Bermuda delegation learned and r eceived invaluable advice, which will help investment in infrastructure which, we are optimistic , will go a long way to help generate jobs. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you very much, Mini ster. House of Assembly The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Minister of Community , [Culture and Sports] . Minister Wayne Scott, you have the floor. GRAND ATLANTIC DEVELO PMENT —UPDATE Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and good morning.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGood morning. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Mr. Speaker, I rise this mor ning to provide a brief Statement to this Honourable House on the status of the Grand Atlantic project . Mr. Speaker, a total of eight proposals were received by the Bermuda Housing Corporation pertaining to the Grand Atlantic …
Good morning. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Mr. Speaker, I rise this mor ning to provide a brief Statement to this Honourable House on the status of the Grand Atlantic project . Mr. Speaker, a total of eight proposals were received by the Bermuda Housing Corporation pertaining to the Grand Atlantic development. The pr oposals include one promoting tourism use, senior res-idential use and mixed use. Mr. Speaker, to date, four entities have been shortlisted for review, with emphasis being placed on tourism use. The process of discussions with local and overseas investors interested in the purchase of the Grand Atlantic property is entering the final stages of sensitive negotiations. The Bermuda Housing Corporation has facilitated the viewing of the property for overseas investors and their local partners, during the past few months. The potential investors were impressed with the recent viewing and agreed to send in a second tier of formal written documentation confirming their interest in the property, and the partnership and associat-ed cost that they envision with the Government to bring jobs, tourists and opportunity to Bermuda. Mr. Speaker the proposals are being carefully vetted and the preferred proposal will be recommended to the Cabinet as soon as possible for consider ation and approval to proceed. Thus, a dec ision on the best long- term use of the Grand Atlantic development that will benefit the entire Island of Bermuda is expected to be made shortly by the Gover nment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you very much, Honourable Minister. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Minister for the Environment. Minister Sylvan Richards, you have the floor. NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN UPDATE Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to update this Honourable House and …
All right. Thank you very much, Honourable Minister. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Minister for the Environment. Minister Sylvan Richards, you have the floor.
NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN UPDATE Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to update this Honourable House and the people of Bermuda on the National Infrastructure Plan and to provide clarity in light of recent misleading statements made by the former Minister of the Environment, Planning and Infrastruc-ture Strategy , current Opposition Leader, the Honourable Marc Bean. Mr. Speaker, f irstly, I would like to ref er to the Monday, September 23rd, 2013 , edition of the Royal Gazette , where the Opposition Leader expresses his thoughts regarding the Premier, Government Minis-ters and p ublic officers attending the recent KPMG Island Infrastructure Summit in Miami, Florida. Mr. Speaker, the following quote was attributed to the Opposition Leader in that Royal Gazette article. And i t says: “As Minister, I attended the summit in 2012 and as a result issued a Request For Pr oposal for the development of a comprehensive infr astructure strategy for the use of future Bermuda Gov-ernments. Mul tiple bids were received and PWC was selected as the successful bid. In the fourth quar ter of 2012, PWC was paid approximately $500,000 to pr oduce the i nfrastructure strategy. ” Mr. Speaker, I did some checking, and the Opposition Leader, in his capacity as a former Minister under the previous Government, actually attended the last KPMG summit , which was held September 22 nd to Septem ber 23rd of 2011. There was no summit held in 2012 due to a number of elections occurring in the various islands, including our own, that would have normally attended that year. Mr. Speaker, there is, however, a much more important clarification that must be pointed out , and that is this : PWC [PricewaterhouseCoopers] , as a r esult of their s uccessful RFP , was given a two- phase contract by the former Government consisting of a Phase I Report and a P hase II Report . The Phase I Report gave a broad overview of the initial consider ations for a Vision for Infrastructure in Bermuda, including strategic drivers which underpin the case for developing th e National Infrastructure Plan. The Phase I Report had a contracted price tag of $50,000 and was completed December 21 st, 2012. To date, the full payment for this Phase I Report is a grand total of $58,181, consisting of $50,000 per the contract, and $8,181 in incidentals. The pur pose of the Phase II Report was to deliver the actual National Infrastructure Plan. This OBA Government has made a decision to not proceed with the Phase II Report at this juncture, and is considering its options with regard to the management of Bermuda’s long -term infrastructure. Mr. Speaker, t his Phase II Report had a contracted price tag of $340,000. As the Phase II Report is not moving forward at this time, the total dollar amount spent on the National Infrastructure Plan to date is $58,181, which is a far cry from the inaccurate $500,000 figure that was quoted repeatedly by the Opposition L eader. Mr. Speaker, the Bermudian public has to be made aware that currently there is no functional N ational Infrastructure Plan in place. Let us be very clear : This Government, the One Bermuda Alliance, is diligently in the process of working out the best way House of Assembly 2134 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report forward. We are hard at work at putting together real plans, which have real potential to help Bermuda get back on track —not pie-in-the-sky, feel-good words, but determined action. We contrast this with the inaccurate information and misquoting of figures that continues to come our way from a former Government that talked about helping Bermudians and getting Bermuda back to work, while, in reality, overseeing the largest mass exodus of jobs in our Island nation’s history. Mr. Speaker, i f we are to truly collaborate and work together, let us all be honest brokers on behalf of the Bermudian people whom we are honoured to serve. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Desk thumping] Th e Speaker: All right. Thank you. [Inaudible interjections and crosstalk ] Th e Speaker: Members, today we are not going to have Members speaking across the floor of the House! Members, I am not going to be tolerating this today. If you would bear with me for a minute before we start the Q uestion P eriod, please. [Pause] QUESTION PERIOD Th e Speaker: Thank you, Members. We will now go to the Question Period. WRITTE N ANSWERS Th e Speaker: First we do have written responses from the Honourable P. J. Gordon- Pamplin on questions from the Honourable Zane De Silva. And now we have oral responses from the Honourable E. T. Richards on the questions from MP David Burt. MP D avid Burt? Mr . E. David Burt: Mr. Speaker, I do not have a copy of the question in front of me, because it is not on the Order Paper. Th e Speaker: Oh, would you like it? Here. [Pause] QUESTION 1: PRICE CONTROL COMMISSION Mr . E. David Burt: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, would the Honourable Minister please advise this Honourable House how many times the Price Control Commission has met since the appointment in March 2013, and will he make a Stat ement on their work? Th e Speaker: Honourable Minis ter? Ho n. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the direct answer to the question of how many times have they met since they have been appointed, is: They have not yet met since their appointment. On the broader context as relates to the very high cost of living in Bermuda, which the Price Commission is supposed to address, I would like to make a few comments on that. First thing is that the Government is very concerned about the high cost of living in Bermuda. And in this regard there are two initiatives that are being undertaken, not by the Price Commission, but in other areas of the Government. The first area is an area that my colleague, the Honourable Grant Gibbons, is going to speak about in a few minutes. And that relates to t he Energy Commission, because a lot of what the Price Commission used to do has been transferred to the Energy Commission. Obviously, energy is the foundation of virtually all costs. And so, the Price Commission itself is a shadow of its former self becaus e energy has been taken away from it, and the responsibility for that. So my honourable colleague is going to comment on that in a few minutes, but it relates to the E nergy Commission and their investigation of the fuel adjustment rate. Secondly, my other honourable colleague, the Honourable Michael Dunkley, has been involved in a committee that is investigating our food prices, particularly prices in supermarkets in Bermuda. And he is going to comment on that in a minute as well. Thirdly, I would like t o say that there are bas ically three essential elements driving prices in Bermuda: fuel, food , and the last one is health care costs. And my honourable colleague, Patricia GordonPamplin , and her department are working diligently on finding solutions in that area as well, and no doubt will bring measures to this House to address those points. So those are the three main elements. They are not being dealt with in the Price Commission, but they are certainly still being dealt with in broader Go vernment. That is the point I want to make. This Government is a firm believer that free markets are the most efficient and cost -effective way of de livering goods and services. Government does not fix prices. In fact, Government — [Inaudible interjections] Th e Speaker: Members, keep it down. I cannot hear. Carry on. House of Assembly
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Government does not fix prices in Bermuda. In fact, Government price- fixing does not work. There is an old saying in economics that you can fix the price of something, and you can fix the supply of something, b ut you cannot fix both at the same time. What that means is that if the Government wants to fix the price of a loaf of bread, they can do so. But they cannot force somebody to bring it in and sell it at that price. And if the price that is fixed is too low and the supplier cannot make any money on it, they just will not bring it in. They just will not sell it. So there will be a shortage of supply. We have seen that happen in communist countries all during the communist era , where there was no inflation in Russia. But the supermarket shelves were bare. So those are the realities. So, it is important that we do not mislead Bermudians to think that the Government of the day, whether it is today or yesterday, or this year or yesteryear, that the Government can wave a magic wand and sort of ban inflation. We cannot. What we can do, Mr. Speaker, is to try to e nsure that free markets work. That where there are, say, like in supermarkets or in retail, where there is supposed to be competition, the Government can en-sure that there really is competition and no price collusion. We can ensure that. And we can also ensure, where there is no competition, there is not a compet itive market, where there is a monopoly, that there is a robust regulatory framework to counterbalance m onopolistic practices. Those are things that the Go vernment can do. And these are the things that we are looking into right now insofar as the cost of living is concerned, in Government.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you, Minister. Yes? [Inaudible interjection]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI think so, yes. Go ahead, sir.
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Mr. Speaker. Good morning, colleagues.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGood morning. SUPPLEMENTARIES
Mr. Walton BrownMr. Speaker, I wonder if the Honourable Finance Minister can answer this question: How many inquiries has the Minister ordered under section 9 of the Price Commission Act [1974]?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: None.
Mr. Walton BrownAnd why is that, Honourable Mi nister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I believe that I answered that question in my remarks just now. We are going about it in a way other than through the Price Commission.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, thank you, Mini ster. Yes. Yes, I recognise the Shadow Minist er of Finance, MP David Burt. SUPPLEMENTARIES
Mr. E. David BurtThank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as a supplementary to the Mini ster’s Statement, and given what he said, and understand ing the dynamics . . . A nd let me just be very clear that this party on this side does not support price controls, because our Leader has …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as a supplementary to the Mini ster’s Statement, and given what he said, and understand ing the dynamics . . . A nd let me just be very clear that this party on this side does not support price controls, because our Leader has said on many occ asions that price controls do not work. However, the Government undertook to speak with the private—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWhat is the question? What is the question?
Mr. E. David BurtYes. This is a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. E. David BurtThe Government undertook to speak with the private sector on reducing costs to help with Government employees who took a pay cut. The Minister’s response would make it seem as though the Government has not lived up to their expectations, seeing that he says that the Government does not have …
The Government undertook to speak with the private sector on reducing costs to help with Government employees who took a pay cut. The Minister’s response would make it seem as though the Government has not lived up to their expectations, seeing that he says that the Government does not have a magic wand on their side of the bargain. What new information can he give my consti tuents on the success that the Government has had with working with the private sector to fulfil that pledge?
House of Assembly 2136 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Yes. We are stretching this que stion, you do realise that. The question was, How many times has the Price Control Commission met, and if he will make a Statement on their work? That was the question. So we are stretching. I am going to allow this question now.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerBut understand that it is stretching it some . Yes. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: T hank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have already answered that question. You know , if the Opposition is fixed on the Price Commission, that is their fixation. We are fixed on trying to …
But understand that it is stretching it some . Yes. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: T hank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have already answered that question. You know , if the Opposition is fixed on the Price Commission, that is their fixation. We are fixed on trying to solve this problem. And we are going about solving this problem. I have explained how we are going about solving this prob-lem.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, you have another supplementary?
Mr. E. David BurtMy supplementary, Mr. Speaker, is that in the Minister’s response, he spoke about how the Government has no magic wand. What I am sa ying is that the Price Control Commission, the Minister has the power to order the Price Control Commission to investigate certain items. He said that the …
My supplementary, Mr. Speaker, is that in the Minister’s response, he spoke about how the Government has no magic wand. What I am sa ying is that the Price Control Commission, the Minister has the power to order the Price Control Commission to investigate certain items. He said that the Gover nment has made a commitment to public sector wor kers that they will get concessions from private sector businesses. All I am asking is, What new information can he give my constituents on the success that the Go vernment has had with that pledge?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, it is a work in progress. And my other colleagues will give some more colour to what we are doing in that regard.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Thank you, Mini ster. Thank you. Yes, MP Roban. QUESTION 1: PRICE CONTROL COMMISSION [Disallowed]
Mr. Walter H . RobanThank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. In light of the Minister’s Statement and also comment as it relates to that the Price [Control] Commission is not a priority, would the Minister at least admit that the issue of prices was made an issue by the Government around their negotiations with …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. In light of the Minister’s Statement and also comment as it relates to that the Price [Control] Commission is not a priority, would the Minister at least admit that the issue of prices was made an issue by the Government around their negotiations with the Government workers and the 4.6 per cent decrease that they were look ing for, as it was the Government —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMember, Member, I really think that we are stretching it a little bit too much. The Minis ter has, I believe, answered the question. The supplementaries that have followed, I believe, have been appr opriate in bringing some clarity to what he said. So I think we will move now …
Mr. Walter H. RobanMr. Speaker, just I would beg your indulgence. So I am not going to get an answer to my question to the Minister?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerDid you hear what I just said?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI now recognise again . . . Oh, you have it? Okay. MP Burt. QUESTI ON 1 : GOV ERNMENT IN TALKS TO TRY TO LOWER FOOD AND ELECTRICITY PRI CES
Mr. E. David BurtGood morning, Mr. Speaker, again. Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Honour able Minister of National Security, who speaks for Home A ffairs in this House. My question is, will the Minister advise this Honourable House on the progress of talks that he and the Minister of Home Affairs …
Good morning, Mr. Speaker, again. Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Honour able Minister of National Security, who speaks for Home A ffairs in this House. My question is, will the Minister advise this Honourable House on the progress of talks that he and the Minister of Home Affairs have held with lead-ing grocers on reducing the price of standard food items, a nd if he will make a statement on the partic ulars of these m eetings?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, MP Burt. Minister? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform this Honourable House that the talks are ongoing. However, in light of the sensitive nature of the subject matter, I am not in a position to make a …
All right. Thank you, MP Burt. Minister?
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform this Honourable House that the talks are ongoing. However, in light of the sensitive nature of the subject matter, I am not in a position to make a statement to this Honour able House at this time. It has been agreed with the stakeholders that, to encourage frank discussion, no public comment will be made in advance of any agreed resolution. The leading grocers are meeting amongst themselves, and once they have the potential options, they will revert to the Government. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerA ll right. Thank you. Yes. As I say, if you have a supplementary, it is your question. So you have the supplementary. I recognise MP Burt. House of Assembly SUPPLEMENTARY
Mr. E. David BurtMr. Speaker, I thank the Minister for his response. I guess my supplementary question would be, Could the Minister please advise how many meetings have been held with supermarket chains?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, I have been involved in at least three discussions. And I cannot count for the other Honourable Member who ha s been involved in this, Minister Fahy .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Yes, MP Blake ney.
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyThank you. I have a suppl emental, Mr. Speaker, to the Honourable Member, Mr. Dunkley.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGo ahead. Yes. SUPPLEMENTARIES
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyI think it absolutely is a good thing that there is some engagement going on. Ho wever, in response to your question, it seems as if it might be a two- tier challenge. The retailers, the gr ocers, super markets , on the one hand; but then, what about the …
I think it absolutely is a good thing that there is some engagement going on. Ho wever, in response to your question, it seems as if it might be a two- tier challenge. The retailers, the gr ocers, super markets , on the one hand; but then, what about the wholesalers? Because if the wholesal ers are not a part of the collaborative effort, then the r etailers could be in a very challenging position be cause if the prices remain the same at wholesale —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerQuestion, MP, about wholesalers?
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneySo, are the wholesalers b eing also consulted, as well as the superm arkets?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Yes. Minister? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, that is up to the leading grocers to get them involved in that conversation and then report back to Government after that.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Thank you, Mini ster. Yes, you had another one? You are allowed to ask another one.
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyJust a follow -up. With regard to the Government’s position, would they not think that is putting the cart before the horse? Because if the retailer is depending on the wholesaler, would it not have been even more prudent to approach the whol e-saler first and get some ground of …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThanks. Minister? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, while I a ppreciate the Honourable Member’s concerns, as a point of reference, I will refer back to the former Government’s press statement in, I think it started in the middle of July 2011, where they looked at this very subject. And …
Thanks. Minister? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, while I a ppreciate the Honourable Member’s concerns, as a point of reference, I will refer back to the former Government’s press statement in, I think it started in the middle of July 2011, where they looked at this very subject. And they have got the wholesalers inv olved from that point. And there was supposed to be a r eport to be delivered to the Minister of Finance at that time. I sat in another place, with the Honourable Member who started this question . . . had said there would be a report delivered to the Minister of Finance, and it would look at ways of ensuring that con sumers get the most reasonable price for the essential goods and services. So we went through all of that exercise, and nothing has been delivered since then, Mr. Speaker. So, I ask the Honoura ble Members, let us get on with the job, and we will report back. At this stage, Mr. Speaker —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, why are you standing?
Mr. E. David BurtStanding for a supplemental. [Laughter] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: At this stage, Mr. S peaker, these are very sensitive discussions. And I believe it is best to let them do it behind closed doors. In good faith they said they would report back to this Gover nment, and we will …
Standing for a supplemental. [Laughter]
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: At this stage, Mr. S peaker, these are very sensitive discussions. And I believe it is best to let them do it behind closed doors. In good faith they said they would report back to this Gover nment, and we will take them on their word. And if we do not hear back in a reasonable period of time, we will approach them again.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Yes, MP Burt. SUPPLEMENTARY
Mr. E. David BurtThank you, Mr. Speaker. Though I welcome the Honourable Minist er’s statement, I would ask if the Minister could actually give a response in this House without blaming the last or the next PLP Government and confess that the cost of living is an issue that the OBA must deal …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Though I welcome the Honourable Minist er’s statement, I would ask if the Minister could actually give a response in this House without blaming the last or the next PLP Government and confess that the cost of living is an issue that the OBA must deal with and has not been able to deal with it thus far?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? H ouse of Assembly 2138 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, anyone who lives in the real world understands that cost of living is a real challenge for everyone. And this Government understands that fully. And, unlike the former Government, we are committed …
Minister?
H ouse of Assembly 2138 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, anyone who lives in the real world understands that cost of living is a real challenge for everyone. And this Government understands that fully. And, unlike the former Government, we are committed to doing something about it. Whether he likes my answer or not, that is the answer he is going to get, Mr. Speaker.
[Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, thank you. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: We understand that not only his constituents, but constituents from one end of the Island to the other are struggling, and this Go vernment has been left a mess, and we are attempting to clean it up and bring a bright ray …
Thank you, thank you.
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: We understand that not only his constituents, but constituents from one end of the Island to the other are struggling, and this Go vernment has been left a mess, and we are attempting to clean it up and bring a bright ray of sunshine in all the rain we have got around here in this Island, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable [Member] , I am not going to have it. I think you heard me earlier today. I am not going to have it! The Chair will now recognise— Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Mr. Speaker, I had a supplementary for Mr. Dunkley.
The SpeakerThe Speaker[Member], you have got to move quic ker than that. But if you do have one, I will allow you to have one. SUPPLEMENTARY Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You are so kind. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister, being that they had …
[Member], you have got to move quic ker than that. But if you do have one, I will allow you to have one.
SUPPLEMENTARY
Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You are so kind. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister, being that they had some meetings with the retailers, What is the increase in the cost of food since 2008, up until now?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, to give an accurate answer, I will report back to the Honourable Mem ber.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThat is fair. Yes. All right. Thank you, Minister. So you will get the answer to MP Burgess ? All right. Thank you. The Chair will now recognise, again, MP Burt. Do you have the question? All right. QUESTION 1: GOV ERNMENT IN TALKS TO TRY TO LOWER FOOD AND …
Mr. E. David BurtYes, Mr. Speaker. And, Mr. Speaker, if I could, I just want to at least make sure that I pr ovide context to the House and to the listenin g public that in the same Statement that the Minister of Home Affairs made to Labour Day, he also said that …
Yes, Mr. Speaker. And, Mr. Speaker, if I could, I just want to at least make sure that I pr ovide context to the House and to the listenin g public that in the same Statement that the Minister of Home Affairs made to Labour Day, he also said that the Minister responsible for the Department of Energy, Dr. Grant Gi bbons, has met with BELCO to discuss ways to reduce the cost of electricity for you, the con-sumer. That is what the Minister of Home Affairs said. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, my question to the Honourable Minister of Economic Development is, Will the Minister please advise this Honourable House on the progress of talks with BELCO on reducing the price of electricity and will he make a Statement?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, let me start by saying that the OBA Government is working with stakeholders to r educe the average elect ricity bill for individuals, families and businesses. We have had several meetings with BELCO and their senior representatives, …
Minister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, let me start by saying that the OBA Government is working with stakeholders to r educe the average elect ricity bill for individuals, families and businesses. We have had several meetings with BELCO and their senior representatives, the most recent being on August 28 th with Walter Higgins, the Ascendant Group CEO. It should be noted that the last base rate established for BELCO was set at February 2012 under the former Progressive Labour Party Government. Earlier this year, under this administration, the Minister of Economic Development authorised the Energy Commission to undertake a review of the fuel adjus tment rate being applied by BELCO. We are in the pr ocess of analysing the findings of that review and are discussing them with BELCO. We have formed an industry representative consultation committee called the Bermuda Energy Working Group, who are working with the Department of Energy and BELCO on a variety of projects, one being the agreement of equitable interconnection agreements. These will allow independent power pr oducers the ability to produce energy and sell that en-ergy to BELCO for distribution on the grid. This diver-sification reduces our all iance upon BELCO as a sole provider and enables them to re- evaluate their pr ocesses and efficiencies. It also introduces competition into the power production industry. And ultimately, we anticipate that will result in price reduction. Our di scussions with BELCO will continue. There are several other initiatives we are working on, each with an aim to lower the average fuel bill. And I will make a Statement when we are ready to report. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Yes, MP Burt, you have a supplementary ? House of Assembly SUPPLEMENTARIES
Mr. E. David BurtMr. Speaker, the Minister’s r esponse, that it seems that discussions are on- going , provides little comfort to my constituents who have seen their fuel adjustment rate increase by 15 per cent from January to September —in the nine months that the OBA have been in Government.
Mr. E. David BurtGiven that the Government has just announced a tax that will raise the cost further, will he ta ke the opportunity to explain to the people of this country why his Government is saying they are working to lower rates, while taking actions that will increase rates?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Mr. Speaker, let me start by sa ying that the former Government had 14 years to do something about the rate of electricity and did nothing. As I said, the last base rate was done under the former administration, and that is the …
Minister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Mr. Speaker, let me start by sa ying that the former Government had 14 years to do something about the rate of electricity and did nothing. As I said, the last base rate was done under the former administration, and that is the base rate in which we are currently operating. The Honourable Member fully understands the fuel adjustment rate is based on the cost of fuel purchased by BELCO and is independent of the Government in that regard. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Did you not have —
Mr. E. David BurtIt is my second one. Mr. Speaker, it is good to see that the Minister is holding true to form and blaming the former Government when they are in the chair. However, since January to September there has been a 15 per cent increase in the fuel adjustment surcharge. Now, …
It is my second one. Mr. Speaker, it is good to see that the Minister is holding true to form and blaming the former Government when they are in the chair. However, since January to September there has been a 15 per cent increase in the fuel adjustment surcharge. Now, they can say that it is not their direct responsibility. The fact is that they promised to lower the cost of electricity.
Mr. E. David BurtSo I ask , again, if he will explain to the people of this country why his Government is sa ying that they will work to reduce rates while they are taking action and rates are increasing.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Mr. Speaker, I think I answered the question already. We are working to reduce rates. I will report when we have essentially good progress to report. The Honourable Member understands completely the fuel adjustment rate, and it was something that was put in …
Minister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Mr. Speaker, I think I answered the question already. We are working to reduce rates. I will report when we have essentially good progress to report. The Honourable Member understands completely the fuel adjustment rate, and it was something that was put in place, has been in place for many, many years. We are looking at that as well. And I think at this point, as I said, they had plenty of opportunity to do something about this, and they did nothing. Thank you.
Mr. Wa lter H. RobanMr. Speaker, I have a suppl ementary to the Minister of Economic Development.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, yes. MP Roban. SUPPLEMENTARY
Mr. Walter H. RobanIs the Minister prepared to at least confirm or admit that reducing the cost of energy in Ber muda would actually do much to increase our international competitiveness more than most other proposals that they have already produced? And also, that bringing the White Paper on energy as a prior …
Is the Minister prepared to at least confirm or admit that reducing the cost of energy in Ber muda would actually do much to increase our international competitiveness more than most other proposals that they have already produced? And also, that bringing the White Paper on energy as a prior ity, as they have discounted it, would actually also do a great deal to lower the cost of energy in Bermuda over time?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think we all understand that being able to have a reduction in the price of electric ity, and fuel generally, would help in terms of not only the cost of living, but also our competitiveness and …
Minister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think we all understand that being able to have a reduction in the price of electric ity, and fuel generally, would help in terms of not only the cost of living, but also our competitiveness and the cost of do ing business in this community. So I think we are all on the same page there. Mr. Speaker, as I have said before, there are initiatives in the White Paper. Some of those were advanc ing. One of the ones I mentioned in my first answer is this issue of getting interconnection so that alternative energy producers who may be involved with solar or other types of alternative energy would be able to sell much (the same way that Tynes Bay does ) energy back to the grid to produce alternate sources and some competition for the existing regul ator. There are other initiatives that we are looking at right now, Mr. Speaker, but we are not ready to r eport on those . Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Minister. We will now move to the first Ministerial Statement, the Ministerial Statement by . . . Oh, there House of Assembly 2140 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report are no questions on the Ministerial Statement by Minister Dunkley. We now move to the Statement on …
All right. Thank you, Minister. We will now move to the first Ministerial Statement, the Ministerial Statement by . . . Oh, there House of Assembly 2140 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
are no questions on the Ministerial Statement by Minister Dunkley. We now move to the Statement on the Infr astructure Summit. And I will recognise first the Honourable Leader of the Opposition, Marc Bean. Leader of the Opposition, you have the floor.
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Good morning, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGood morning. And good to see you back . Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And thank you for allowing my MPs to comment , talk to you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo problem, no problem. QUESTION 1: KPM G INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMIT Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, I refer to the Ministerial Statement by Minister Moniz, where he indicates that four Ministers and six civil servants at-tended the latest Infrastructure Summit. Mr. Speaker, the Minister also indicates that the Premier …
No problem, no problem.
QUESTION 1: KPM G INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMIT
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, I refer to the Ministerial Statement by Minister Moniz, where he indicates that four Ministers and six civil servants at-tended the latest Infrastructure Summit. Mr. Speaker, the Minister also indicates that the Premier spoke on day one and the Minister Moniz spoke on day two. My question is, What , then, was the purpose of the attendance or presence of Minister Crockwell and Minister Richards?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Minister? Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Mr. Speaker, we were not there just to speak. We were there also to listen. But it is also true that Minister Crockwell participated in a panel for presentation of the projects of the airport and the new crossings bridge. So he also participated. …
Yes. Minister?
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Mr. Speaker, we were not there just to speak. We were there also to listen. But it is also true that Minister Crockwell participated in a panel for presentation of the projects of the airport and the new crossings bridge. So he also participated. But the listening part was just as important as the speaking. Perhaps that is good advice for the O pposition Leader.
[Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. The Chair now . . . Is it a question, MP Burgess? Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: A question, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerA question from MP Burgess. MP Burgess, you have the floor. QUESTION 1: KPM G INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMIT Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes. Mr. Speaker, I would like to know from the Minister, Did the Minister inform the delegates at the summit that the project that was scheduled to be …
A question from MP Burgess. MP Burgess, you have the floor.
QUESTION 1: KPM G INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMIT
Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes. Mr. Speaker, I would like to know from the Minister, Did the Minister inform the delegates at the summit that the project that was scheduled to be finished, complete by May 15 th, was not completed for the arrival of the Break away?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Mr. Speaker, it is not a ser ious question. We have never said the project would be total ly finished at any point in time. It was never stated. So he is just being silly. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. A question is a question. Yes, carry on, MP Burgess. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes. You know, Mr. Speaker, this Member calls everything “ silly.”
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAnd, Honourable Member, it is not a silly que stion. It is a good question. I think any question, Honourable Members, that anyone . . . If anyone stands up — Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes. Everything he cannot answer —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust a minute, sir. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: —is silly. The S peaker: Can you hold for one second? Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Certainly.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust to let Members know that any Member who stands and asks a question, it is i mportant to that person that they ask that question. So we must respect that. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Well, let me ask a supplementary.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Yes. A supplementary. SUPPLEMENTARIES Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: What was the success that he reported on Heritage Wharf?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWhat was the success? Mr. Derrick V. B urgess, Sr.: Yes.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Mr. Speaker, as that Member will know, due to the defects and deficiencies in the construction of Heritage Wharf, we needed to upgrade that wharf in order for the new Breakaway to be able House of Assembly to tie alongside on May the 15th of …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you, Minister. Yes, you have a supplementary? Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Mr. Speaker, did this Honourable Member inform the summit that the shi p Brea kaway tied up to the original wharf?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? [Crosstalk] Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Did—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, I heard the question. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: All right.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Minister, do you want to respond to that ? Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: There is only one Heritage Wharf.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSo, did — Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: It is tied up to Heritage Wharf.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Yes? QUESTION 2: KPM G INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMIT Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Mr. Speaker, did the Minister inform the summit that the workforce at the Heritage Wharf project was made up of 60 per cent Bermudians and 40 per cent guest workers?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: The delegates were informed that this was a very successful collaborative effort between the Government local contractors and the nec-essary foreign advisors and contractors.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIt is your last question. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess , Sr.: Well, I just want to make a comment.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo, no. You cannot make a comment, Honourable Member, not at this time, Honourable Member. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Well, Mr. Speaker —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, S r.: Yes?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNot at this time, you cannot make a comment. QUESTION 3: KPM G INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMIT Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Okay, Mr. Speaker. Supplementary. Did the Member, the Honourable Member, inform the summit that the equipment that was nee ded to fix, make the upgrades at Heritage Wharf were brought …
Not at this time, you cannot make a comment.
QUESTION 3: KPM G INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMIT
Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Okay, Mr. Speaker. Supplementary. Did the Member, the Honourable Member, inform the summit that the equipment that was nee ded to fix, make the upgrades at Heritage Wharf were brought in from overseas when we had that equi pment available in Bermuda?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Minister? Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: That statement, to the best of my information, is incorrect, particularly with respect to the 200- ton crane that had to be brought in.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. You have had all your questions, Honourable Member. MP Roban. [Inaudible interjection]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo, no, no! Honourable Member, yo u have had all . . . You have had several. You have asked a lot of questions, Honourable Member. Yes, yes, yes. Carry on, MP Roban. QUESTION 1: KPM G INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMIT
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for Minister Moniz in relation to his Stat ement. Minister Moniz did mention in his Statement that there were discussions of Heritage Wharf. And his a nswers , to date, in this House as it relates to the questions already presented was …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for Minister Moniz in relation to his Stat ement. Minister Moniz did mention in his Statement that there were discussions of Heritage Wharf. And his a nswers , to date, in this House as it relates to the questions already presented was that Heritage Wharf is not complete. But I would ask for the Minister to clarify that —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWhat is the question? What do you want —
Mr. Walter H. RobanIn a [ Royal Gazette] article on the 23rd of this month, it was mentioned that the Minister would be talking about the recently completed Heritage Wharf. So, which answer is correct? Is Her itage Wharf complete? Is that what he told the people in House of Assembly 2142 27 …
In a [ Royal Gazette] article on the 23rd of this month, it was mentioned that the Minister would be talking about the recently completed Heritage Wharf. So, which answer is correct? Is Her itage Wharf complete? Is that what he told the people in House of Assembly 2142 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Miami? What is the actual state of the project at Heri tage Wharf?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Okay. Minister? Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Once again, there are the completed works on Heritage Wharf, and there are still the on -going works, which both affect Heritage Wharf and King’ s Wharf. There is a southern mooring dolphin that has to be completed. There is fendering that has …
Yes. Okay. Minister? Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Once again, there are the completed works on Heritage Wharf, and there are still the on -going works, which both affect Heritage Wharf and King’ s Wharf. There is a southern mooring dolphin that has to be completed. There is fendering that has to be completed. The work is on- going. The list of defects and deficiencies from the previous construction are huge.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSuppl ementary. Yes. SUPPLEMENTARY
Mr. Walter H. RobanAll I can say, all I can ask is that I am not sure the Minister has answered the question, because statements that have already gone out publicly have suggested—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWell, he can only answer the way he —
Mr. Walter H. RobanThey have stated that the Mi nister said it was complete —not that there were ongoing modifications. So, what is the actual state? What is the actual state; and what are the measures taken on the wharf ?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI think he just answered, he just replied to that. Maybe it is not satisfactory in your regard, but I think —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. I think that he answered it. MP, you have a question? Okay.
Mr. Walter H. RobanMay I go on to my next question, Mr. Speaker? The Speaker: Yes. Yes. QUESTION 2: KPM G INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMIT
Mr. Walter H. RobanMr. Speaker, in the Statement that the Minister just made, the Minister mentioned the setting up of the Economic Development Committee, which was created, as the Premier emphasised, to cut down on the bureaucracy, thereby enabling projects to progress quickly. The Minister then also, Mr. Speaker, in the next paragraph, …
Mr. Speaker, in the Statement that the Minister just made, the Minister mentioned the setting up of the Economic Development Committee, which was created, as the Premier emphasised, to cut down on the bureaucracy, thereby enabling projects to progress quickly. The Minister then also, Mr. Speaker, in the next paragraph, spoke about the P3 development at KEMH Hospital. And it was emphasised that it was noted that that project was devised far more quickly than such pr ojects in other jurisdictions. Can the Minister actually clarify for us what is more efficient through the Economic Development Committee than what was done with the KEMH pr oject, si nce it is highly regarded as one of the most eff icient P3 projects ever done by any jurisdiction?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Well, I do not know that I have time to teach that honourable gentleman how the government works. The Economic Development Committee is a subcommittee of Cabinet, which deals with new pr ojects coming forward. The P3 project at King Edward Hospital was a very …
Minister?
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Well, I do not know that I have time to teach that honourable gentleman how the government works. The Economic Development Committee is a subcommittee of Cabinet, which deals with new pr ojects coming forward. The P3 project at King Edward Hospital was a very specific project of the Bermuda Hospitals Board that they took forward and which was in regard to the speed with which the P3 was set up, was done very speedily. There were shortcomings in that project with respect to the vision of the project, et cetera. But I would allow my honourable colleague, the Minister of Health, to speak to those.
Mr. Walter H. RobanCan the Minister clarify, since the Minister seems to be so knowledgeable, what the actual shortcomings were in light of the highly regar ded opinions of the P3 project and how it was done at that summit? And I am quite familiar with the project, because I actually guided it …
Can the Minister clarify, since the Minister seems to be so knowledgeable, what the actual shortcomings were in light of the highly regar ded opinions of the P3 project and how it was done at that summit? And I am quite familiar with the project, because I actually guided it to its near getting started. So I u nderstand how that works. But can the Minister clarify specifically what shortcomings there were with the P3 formula and why the use of the Economic D evelopment Committee is going to improve that pr ocess of infrastruc ture development?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Mr. Speaker, I have already answered that. The Economic Development Commi ttee deals with the Cabinet level of Ministers collaborating their departments. The P3 project at the hosp ital was a project by a quango, the Bermuda Hospitals Board. It is an entirely different thing. …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you very much, Honourable Members. I now move to the next Statement, the Grand Atlantic Statement. I recognise the Honourable Member Lawrence Scott. QUESTION 1: GRAND ATLANTIC DEVELO PMENT —UPDATE
Mr. W. Lawre nce ScottThank you, Mr. Speaker. My first question to the Honourable Minister is, How many of these shortlisted companies are Bermudi an or Bermudian- owned companies?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think every one of these shortlisted projects have a Bermudian component.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Minister? Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: I do not understand where the confusion comes with that. There are Bermudian companies that are working with foreign i nvestors. There are multiple companies that are wor king together . Each one of these shortlisted projects comprise s collaborative efforts.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. Yes, MP Scott? QUESTION 2 : GRAND ATLANTIC DEVELO PMENT —UPDATE
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottA second question is, Would the Minister deem that this project, this site, is safe for tourists?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Let me answer the question this way, if I may, Mr. Speaker. I think —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAnswer the question. He said, Is it safe for tourists? That is what you need to answer. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Well, the only thing that this question is not safe for has been the Consolidated Fund of Bermuda. [Laughter] Hon. R. Wayne Scott: I think that —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe question is, Is it safe for tourists? Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thanks. QUESTION 3 : GRAND ATLANTIC DEVELO PMENT —UPDATE
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottAnd my third question is, When will the residents of constituency 24 be brought in and their views and concerns in regards to the f uture of the Grand Atlantic project be addressed?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Mr. Speaker, this is the pr oject. In just doing some quick math (when we talk about the constituents of the area) , that cost $42 mi llion, the taxpayer of Bermuda has into it, at 78 uni ts at approximately 1,100 square feet, each …
Minister?
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Mr. Speaker, this is the pr oject. In just doing some quick math (when we talk about the constituents of the area) , that cost $42 mi llion, the taxpayer of Bermuda has into it, at 78 uni ts at approximately 1,100 square feet, each that is just u nder 86,000 square feet at $200 a square foot, that pr oject should have cost about $17 million, using that estimate. So, I think what we are trying to do right now is to say make lemons out of lemonade would be an extraordinary, I guess —
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberMake lemonade out of lemons. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, just to make lemonade out of lemons would be kind of . . . Well, it would be talking down on lemonade, because this is a mess. And I think that what we are actually doing is trying to figure …
Make lemonade out of lemons.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, just to make lemonade out of lemons would be kind of . . . Well, it would be talking down on lemonade, because this is a mess. And I think that what we are actually doing is trying to figure out the best way forward for the res idents. I live in that area. And I can tell you that it is a pain seeing this area just sit there, unused. But these are the cards that we have been dealt. And I am wor king diligently —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSo your answer to the question is? Hon. R. Wayne Scott: We are working diligently. And as I said in the Statement, that will be provided in further updates shortly. As I have commit-ted in this House, and I have committed to t he people of Bermuda, I will continue …
So your answer to the question is? Hon. R. Wayne Scott: We are working diligently. And as I said in the Statement, that will be provided in further updates shortly. As I have commit-ted in this House, and I have committed to t he people of Bermuda, I will continue to keep everyone in the loop as I try to figure out this problem.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you, Minister. Yes? House of Assembly 2144 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report SUPPLEMENTARY
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottThe Honourable Member did not answer the question. When will the constituents be brought in and be able to speak to the Minister or the people involved to have their concerns addressed direc tly?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? Hon. R. Wayne Scott: The constituents are welcome to speak with me anytime. I can be reached at 5313401. My e- mail address is rwscott@gov.bm . I have no problem answering or listening to concerns of res idents, which many residents have contacted me with concerns.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: You can call me anytime.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Yes. MP Burt, do you have a supplementary? SUPPLEMENTARY
Mr. E. David BurtYes, just a supplementary on the question that was asked the Minister regarding whether there was a Bermudian component or not. Would the Government consider —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThis is late, you know. You should have asked that question when we were dealing with that. And I am going to give you the leeway. But, you know, we have conversation about an issue. And we stay on that i ssue. When we move from that issue, we have …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right? So, this time, go ahead.
Mr. E. David BurtMr. Speaker, the question that I would ask is, Would the Government consider, be-cause we say Bermudia n component , et cetera — would the Government consider selling that property to a foreign owner?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Minister? Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. We now move . . . I am sorry, I was saying , That concludes. But the Leader of the Opposition is really ready to jump up. We go now . . . The next [question] is [regarding] the Statement …
All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. We now move . . . I am sorry, I was saying , That concludes. But the Leader of the Opposition is really ready to jump up. We go now . . . The next [question] is [regarding] the Statement on the Infrastructure Plan, by the Minis ter for the Environment, Minister Richards. I do recognise the Leader of the Opposition, MP Marc Bean. You have the floor. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. And Mr. Speaker, I need to ask these questions as slowly as possible for the clarity of the public.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Take your time. QUESTION 1: NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN UPDATE Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, sir. Mr. Speaker, in context, the Premier at the National Infrastructure Summit told everyone that his Government was working with transparency and integrity and is committed to work collaboratively with persons who …
All right. Take your time.
QUESTION 1: NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN UPDATE Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, sir. Mr. Speaker, in context, the Premier at the National Infrastructure Summit told everyone that his Government was working with transparency and integrity and is committed to work collaboratively with persons who want to invest in our infrastructure. Mr. Speaker, I now ask Minister Sylvan Ric hards the first question. And it is a serious question, Mr. Speaker : Who was the author of this Ministerial Statement, either his [Permanent Secretary] or hi mself? And [there] is a reason, Mr. Speaker, because my name is spel led wrong. Right? And I have a su pplemental based on that response.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Honourable Minister? Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, I wrote the Ministerial Statement. And I apologise to the Honourable Member for misspelling his name. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: No problem.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. SUPPLEMENTARY Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, my suppl emental is, and I quote: Mr. Speaker, the Minister said he did some checking. He said “I did some checking, and the Opposition Leader, in his capacity as a former Minister under the previous Government, actually attended the …
Thank you.
SUPPLEMENTARY
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, my suppl emental is, and I quote: Mr. Speaker, the Minister said he did some checking. He said “I did some checking, and the Opposition Leader, in his capacity as a former Minister under the previous Government, actually attended the last KPMG summit, which was held Se ptember 22 nd to September 23rd, 2011. There was no summit held in 2012 due to a number of elections occurring in various i slands. ” Mr. Speaker, is the Minister aware that I became the Minister of Environment, Planning and Infr astruc ture Strategy on November 1st, 2011? And is he aware that I attended the KPMG summit on January the 19 th and 20th, 2012?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister? House of Assembly Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, if my facts are incorrect, then I have to apologise. I rely on my civil servants for the information. Some Hon. Member s: Ooh! Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, he said he wrote the Statement . Hon. …
Minister?
House of Assembly
Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, if my facts are incorrect, then I have to apologise. I rely on my civil servants for the information.
Some Hon. Member s: Ooh!
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, he said he wrote the Statement . Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: But I did write the Statement, based on the information that was given to me. That happens all the time. I do not think that is unusual.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. And that is reasonable, Members. That is reasonable. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: We make errors, Mr. Speaker. We are human. Mr. Speaker?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Carry on, Leader. Speak to the Chair. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, thank you. I would like to now quote more in this quasi - Statement.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAre you doing another question now? Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Yes, second question.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSecond question, yes, yes. QUESTION 2: NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN UPDATE Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, the Minister says the Phase I Report gave a broad overview of the initial consideration for a Vision for I nfrastructure in Bermuda inclusive of strategic drivers which underpin the case for developing …
Second question, yes, yes.
QUESTION 2: NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN UPDATE Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, the Minister says the Phase I Report gave a broad overview of the initial consideration for a Vision for I nfrastructure in Bermuda inclusive of strategic drivers which underpin the case for developing the National Infrastructure Plan. Now, this is the Pricew aterhouseCoopers r eport, for the edification of the listening public. The Phase I Report had a contracted price tag of $50,000 and was completed December 21 st, 2012. To date, the full payment for the Phase I Report is a grand total of $58, 181 in total. Mr. Speaker, my second question is, When will Phase I be made public —Phase I that was completed after the One Bermuda Alliance Government became the Government. When will it be made public?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Leader. Minister? Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, the Phase I was delivered to Cabinet. And we looked at it, and we deliberated on it. And we decided that, based on the fact that we wanted to get our arms wrapped around what had been done and …
Thank you, Leader. Minister? Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, the Phase I was delivered to Cabinet. And we looked at it, and we deliberated on it. And we decided that, based on the fact that we wanted to get our arms wrapped around what had been done and what needs to be done —more importantly, what needs to be done in the future— we deci ded that we would not proceed with Phase I of the report. So, Phase I was completed December 2000. And we are going to deliberate further, and then we will make a decision on whether it will be revealed to the public.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Supplemental, please.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, supplementary. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, again, suppl emental.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. SUPPLEMENTARIES Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: The Minister went on to say the purpose of the Phase II Report was to deliver the actual National Infrastructure Plan. “ This OBA Go vernment has made a decision to not proceed with the Phase II R eport at this juncture, and …
Yes.
SUPPLEMENTARIES
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: The Minister went on to say the purpose of the Phase II Report was to deliver the actual National Infrastructure Plan. “ This OBA Go vernment has made a decision to not proceed with the Phase II R eport at this juncture, and is considering its options with regard to the management of Bermuda’s long-term infr astructure. ” My second supplemental, Mr. Speaker, is, For a Government that never acknowledged a National Infrastructure Plan, when did they make this decision and w hy did they come to this decision to not pr oceed? When did they make it and why?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. All right. Minister? Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Phase I was initially brought to Cabinet in February 26 th of this year and then again in June 4th of this year. And we deliberated over it, and we decided that we needed to basically …
Thank you. All right. Minister? Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Phase I was initially brought to Cabinet in February 26 th of this year and then again in June 4th of this year. And we deliberated over it, and we decided that we needed to basically do our own due diligence on what had been done, and then also get our arms around what needs to be done in the future. And we made a collective decision that we were not comfortable with . . . We were not going to go with what Phase II basically was looking to do. So we are going to continue to work on developing our National Infr astructure Plan. We do recognise that a National Infrastructure Plan is needed, but as a new Government, we want to make sure that what we implement is comprehensive and serves Bermuda’s needs in the future. House of Assembly 2146 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Yes, yes? Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, one more supplementary on that question.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes? Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Based on the Minist er’s r esponse, can he tell us, When was Phase II of the r eport r eceived by the Government, for them to make a decision not to proceed? [Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on. Ask the question then. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, based on t he response from the Minister, can he tell this Honour able House, When was Phase II received for the Go vernment to make a decision not to proceed with it? [Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, you can answer. You can answer. Hon. Ma rc A. R. Bean: It is a simple question. It is a simple question. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Okay. Let me try and be as clear as I can.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: We received Phase I, which was delivered by the previous Government D ecember 21 st, 2012. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: We were not the Government then. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: It was crafted by the previous Government.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWell, it would have been . . . So you received it from . . . they were the Opposition at the time. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Okay. The Phase I, which was done by the previous Government, we r eceived December 21 st, 2012.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Right. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: It was brought to our Cabinet, initially, February 26th, 2013, and then again on June 4th, 2013.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Right. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Phase I. The object of Phase I was to authorise Phase II. Phase II does not exist, because we did not proceed with it. The purpose of Phase I was to authorise P hase II. So, Phase II does not exist.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you, Minister. I think you have answered that. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Just for clarity —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. And another — Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: No, just for clarification. Will it be permi tted?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Go ahead. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Because the Minister did say that he actually, based on their reading of Phase II they decided not to proceed, is what he just said in his clarification , so we need clarity.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right . I think it was reading of Phase I. I think he said reading of Phase I. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Okay. Maybe the Minister has mixed up his times, dates and stuff.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. From what I understand, it was the reading of Phase I that led to not — Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Okay. All right.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerDo you have another question? Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: This is my third question.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThird question, yes. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Third and final question.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerDo you have a supplementary on that? The Honourable Member has a supplementary. You are paying attention, MP Blakeney. You are paying attention. Very good.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on, MP Blakeney. House of Assembly
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyI see you as a headmaster, and I do not like to be admonished by you. [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on, MP Blakeney. SUPPLEMENTARIES
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyGiven the answer that the Honourable Member, Minister Richards, gave regar ding the first Phase, would he explain why he as a Mi nister, and as Government , has turned back on [his] commitment to transparency when he states that they will still deliberate and there is the possibility of …
Given the answer that the Honourable Member, Minister Richards, gave regar ding the first Phase, would he explain why he as a Mi nister, and as Government , has turned back on [his] commitment to transparency when he states that they will still deliberate and there is the possibility of the document not being shared with the general public , given the number of times that they have conveyed to the public that they will be a Government of transpar-ency?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. All right. Yes. Minister? Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMembers, you know, before the day is out, something is going to happen in here—b efore the day is out if we continue like this. Carry on, Minister. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . The Phase I that was brought to us, it was not our …
Members, you know, before the day is out, something is going to happen in here—b efore the day is out if we continue like this. Carry on, Minister. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . The Phase I that was brought to us, it was not our work. It is just like if I inherit work from somebody else and I am not comfortable with the work, then I am not going to proceed with it. I am not going to show it to anyone, because my name is going t o be attached to it. So, the short answer is that Phase I was done. But we decided not to proceed with Phase II.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. And a supplementary?
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyGiven the fact that taxp ayers’ money to the tune of $58,000 was used, notwit hstanding who commissioned the report or the project that you now feel the public who has underwritten the cost is not due any accountability in having a fair sight [of] to assess what was done …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Minister? Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, $58,000 was spent on Phase I. I guess we have to decide whether that was the best use of that $58,000. But the point to be made is it was $58,000, not $500,000, which is what the …
Thank you. Minister? Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, $58,000 was spent on Phase I. I guess we have to decide whether that was the best use of that $58,000. But the point to be made is it was $58,000, not $500,000, which is what the Leader of the Oppos ition said. I also need to clarify . . . the Honourable O pposition Leader said that he attended the KPMG summit in January 2012. He did not attend the KPMG summit in January 2012. He attended an energy con-ference by Platts in the Bahamas.
[Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Honourable Member, we are not going to spend time. Honourable Member, thanks. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: I have to respond. I have to respond to that.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. V ery quickly. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: The public and yourself, this Honourable House can check Bernews to see the dates of myself and Minister Weeks.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Okay. Thank you. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Subsequently, the next week, we went to the Platts energy conference in Nassau, Bahamas, at which time we also—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: —had an opportunity to look at the Nassau port development.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you. Thank you. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: It is factually correct.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. I think that the one thing . . . Let me just say this. It is that Members —and I am saying this to Members on both sides of the House— we must r emember that what we say is for the record. And we must work …
Thank you, Minister. I think that the one thing . . . Let me just say this. It is that Members —and I am saying this to Members on both sides of the House— we must r emember that what we say is for the record. And we must work extremely hard to ensure that what we bring to this floor is accurate.
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. House of Assembly 2148 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAnd I would just like to put that out , that all of us —all of us —whatever we say in this House has to be accurate. We are dealing with the people’s business. And we cannot afford not to be that way. So I am asking all Members, please, …
And I would just like to put that out , that all of us —all of us —whatever we say in this House has to be accurate. We are dealing with the people’s business. And we cannot afford not to be that way. So I am asking all Members, please, to bear that in mind. Thank you.
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Third question.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. QUESTION 3: NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN UPDATE Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is my third question. The Minister states that I stated —and he is correct —that in the fourth quarter (and it was actually third quarter) of 2012, Pricew aterhouseCoopers [PWC] was paid …
Thank you.
QUESTION 3: NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN UPDATE Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is my third question. The Minister states that I stated —and he is correct —that in the fourth quarter (and it was actually third quarter) of 2012, Pricew aterhouseCoopers [PWC] was paid approximately, approximately $500,000 to produce the Infrastructure Strategy. Mr. Speaker, I go on in the Ministerial Stat ement, where the Minister says, “This Phase II Report had a contracted price tag of $340,000. As the Phase II Report is not moving forward at this time, the total dollar amount spent on the National Infrastructure Plan is $58,181, which is a far cry from the inaccurate $500,000, ” Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my third question to the Honourable Member is, Is approximately $500,000 similar to a total of $340,000 plus $58,000, which is $400,000?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Yes, Minister? Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, I am going to be honest. I do not really understand that ques-tion. It sounds like fuzzy math is going on here. [Laughter] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Can he repeat that question again?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerLet him. Let him. Honourable Member, would you bring clarity to your question? Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: I will be very clear. The Minister, to laughter on his side, claimed that I was inacc urate by saying that we spent approximately $500,000 on this strategy. And he claims that …
Let him. Let him. Honourable Member, would you bring clarity to your question?
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: I will be very clear. The Minister, to laughter on his side, claimed that I was inacc urate by saying that we spent approximately $500,000 on this strategy. And he claims that to date they have only spent $58,181. But just above that, he says that Phase II was $ 340,000. Combined, the total is $400,000, Mr. Speaker. I am asking the Minister, Is approximately a half a million similar to $400,000 and not the $58,000 that he says in his Ministerial Statement , to deflect from his irresponsibility?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. I see. I see. Well, apparently — [Inaudible interjections and crosstalk ]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Members, this is the last time I am going to say that I do not want shouting across the floor. I have said that that is my position. Honourable Member, Minister Richards, you have the floor. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, if you …
Honourable Members, this is the last time I am going to say that I do not want shouting across the floor. I have said that that is my position. Honourable Member, Minister Richards, you have the floor. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, if you would indulge me, I would just quote from the Royal Gazette article.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI think . . . I think . . . All you need to do is explai n what you understood happened. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Okay. Okay. The Ho nourable Member, the Leader of the Opposition, has said repeatedly in the printed press, on electronic m edia, that …
I think . . . I think . . . All you need to do is explai n what you understood happened. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Okay. Okay. The Ho nourable Member, the Leader of the Opposition, has said repeatedly in the printed press, on electronic m edia, that in the fourth quarter of 2012, PWC was paid approx imately $500,000 to produce the infrastructure strategy. That is not the case. That is not the case! PWC has been paid a total of $58,181. It is simple.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust so we get clarity, so the $340,000 was contracted but never spent? Is that what you are saying? Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Yes, Mr. Speaker. It was contracted, but never spent.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. All right. Yes. That is what I mean. That seems , to me, to clear the issue. I hope that clears the issue. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Yes! It does.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: I have one supplemental.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou have a supplementary? All right. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Yes, hooked to my third question.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Okay. SUPPLEMENTARY Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, the Minister says, in the end, in closing, “T he Bermudian public has to be made aware that currently there is no functional National Infrastructure Plan in place. Let us be very clear : This Government, the One Bermuda All …
Yes. Okay.
SUPPLEMENTARY Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Mr. Speaker, the Minister says, in the end, in closing, “T he Bermudian public has to be made aware that currently there is no functional National Infrastructure Plan in place. Let us be very clear : This Government, the One Bermuda All iance, is diligently in the process of working out the House of Assembly
best way forward. We are hard at work at putting t ogether real plans , which have real potential to help Bermuda get back on track —not pie- in-the-sky, feelgood words. ” Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is, Is the Phase II Report produced by the reputable i nterna tiona l firm, Pricew aterhouseCoopers, not a real plan? And is it a pie- in-the-sky plan, Phase I and Phase II?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Minister? Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am going to help this Honourable Opposition Leader to comprehend what I am saying.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust answer [the] question, Honourable Member. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: It is pie in the sky, b ecause Phase II does not exist. It does not exist. Phase I was put in place to give a $40,000 outline of what Phase II would do. Phase I was the structure …
Just answer [the] question, Honourable Member. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: It is pie in the sky, b ecause Phase II does not exist. It does not exist. Phase I was put in place to give a $40,000 outline of what Phase II would do. Phase I was the structure of the document that was to become Phase II. We decided not to proceed with Phase II. Phase II does not exist! In my book, that is pie in the sky.
SPEAKER’S RULING [Unparliamentary language]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Thank you. And I would like you to withdraw that stat ement pie in the sky. All right? There is nothing . . . In fact, had I noticed that in the Statement, I would have asked you to remove it. So pie in the sky, …
All right. Thank you. Thank you. And I would like you to withdraw that stat ement pie in the sky. All right? There is nothing . . . In fact, had I noticed that in the Statement, I would have asked you to remove it. So pie in the sky, really, you should wit hdraw pie in the sky , because it is imputing improper motives here. You know, there is nothing such as pie in the sky.
Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Okay, Honourable Mr. Speaker, I will withdraw that.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank y ou, Honourable Member. And, Honourable Members, I am taking no more questions on this. We have exhausted this Statement. And I thank all Members for their attention to the matter. Members, we move now to . . . I think that was the last Statement, was it not? …
Thank y ou, Honourable Member. And, Honourable Members, I am taking no more questions on this. We have exhausted this Statement. And I thank all Members for their attention to the matter. Members, we move now to . . . I think that was the last Statement, was it not? Yes. We move now to Congratulatory and/or Obituary Speeches.
[Timer beeps.]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWow. The time was just up, too. That was good timing. CONGRATULATORY AND/OR OBITUARY SPEECHES
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Chair will recognise the Honour able Member, Minister Scott. You have the floor. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On a lighter note, I would like to congratulate the Bermuda Women’s Under 17 National Football team, who have just won their third consecutive game in a row …
The Chair will recognise the Honour able Member, Minister Scott. You have the floor.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On a lighter note, I would like to congratulate the Bermuda Women’s Under 17 National Football team, who have just won their third consecutive game in a row in Haiti by defeating Grenada 2 –0 on Wednesday and advancing them to the semi -finals undefeated. And I would like to associate the whole House with that. That is a great accomplishment for our Under 17 footballers. And also, Mr. Speaker, having watched this Trunk Island Swim on Sunday, I want to congratulate 14-year-old Jesse Washington for winning that. The female winner was 12- year-old Emma Harvey — amazing, the youngest finalist in both the male and female divisions. And that is just a phenomenal swim. So, congratulations to our young athletes.
[Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair , 11:26:2]
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are there any other Members? The Chair recognises the Honourable Minist er from St. David’s, Ms. L. F. Foggo, from constituency 3. You have the floor.
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to give a congratulatory remark to both St. David’s Primary and, in particular, Ms. Kristi Foggo, who is the P6 teacher down there and was recognised by the Bermuda Reading Association’s President Award for Outstanding Teacher of the Year. I have to …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to give a congratulatory remark to both St. David’s Primary and, in particular, Ms. Kristi Foggo, who is the P6 teacher down there and was recognised by the Bermuda Reading Association’s President Award for Outstanding Teacher of the Year. I have to say that Ms. Foggo is a phenomenal teacher. For the past two years, St. David’s Primary P6, in the Cambridge exams, has scored extremely high, being one of the top schools in Bermuda in terms of per formance. So I thought it necessary to come here and speak in honour of her commitment as a teacher and what she has been able to get her P6 students to do in terms of how well they score on the Cambridge exam. So, accolades for both Ms. Foggo and for St. David’s Primary School.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are there any other Members? The Chair recognises the Honourable J. P. [sic] Gordon- Pamplin. House of Assembly 2150 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report You have the floor. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Ma dam Deputy Speaker. It is P. J.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerRight. Thank you. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Ma dam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, on a very sad note, I would ask that this Honourable House send condolences to the family of young Nosaj Stovell, was who tragically killed. And I believe that the entire House wishes …
Right. Thank you.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Ma dam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, on a very sad note, I would ask that this Honourable House send condolences to the family of young Nosaj Stovell, was who tragically killed. And I believe that the entire House wishes to be associated with those remarks of condolence. I would also ask that this Honourable House send condolences to the family of Ethel Lodge, who in her 93 rd year passed away at the early part of the week. She was an absolutely delightful lady, Madam Deputy Speaker. I can remember the last time I went to visit her, and I said, I just want to make sure that the registr ations are correct and that you are the only registered voter here. And she says, Oh, yes, I am. I said, I just want to check. I want to make sure that you haven’t had a new husband since the last time I was here. And she just laughed so heartily. And she sa ys, Oh, you have got to come back. We have got to have tea because I like your style. So, she was an abs olutely delightful lady, and I would ask that condolences be sent to her children, Chris, Jeremy and Bryan. On a more positive note, I would ask that t his Honourable House send a letter of congratulations to SCARS [Saving Children And Revealing Secrets] and CAA (the Committee Against Abuse) for an extremely informative dinner that they put on last week, with a guest speaker, Johnetta McSwain, who spoke to the issues of childhood abuse. It was really a heart - rending presentation by Ms. McSwain, having acknowledged her own upbringing and the challenges that she faced, but more importantly, her ability to rise above and to be able to get on top of what was a n absolutely heinous growing -up experience for her. The Honourable Member, Zane De Silva, the Honourable Member, Michael Dunkley, the Honour able Member, Glen Smith, and the Honourable Mem-ber, Wayne Scott, would also like to be associated with those remarks, too, for SCARS and CAA. Finally, I would ask that this Honourable House send a letter of congratulations to the Bermuda College, who in conjunction with SickKids Hospital [Hospital for Sick Children] in Toronto, have made available —or Sic kKids has made available through collaboration with Bermuda College the ability for nursing students to actually go to SickKids in Toronto and have hands -on practical experience while they are completing their nursing trai ning. I believe that this will bode well for the quality of nurses that are being produced in the programme that is being offered by the Bermuda College, and I would like for letters of congratulations to be sent on this collabor ative effort. The Honourable Member, Walton Brown, would like to be associated with those remarks, and I would imagine the Honourable Member, Jeanne Atherden, would also like to be associated with those remarks. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are there other Members? The Chair recognises the Honourable G. A. Blakeney, Shadow Minister of Economy, from Devon-shire North Central, constituency 13.
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to take this opportunity, on behalf of this Honourable House, to convey congratula tions on a very successful parish council meeting held by the Devonshire Parish Council and hosted at the Elliot Primary School a couple of nights ago, where Ms. Kimberly …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to take this opportunity, on behalf of this Honourable House, to convey congratula tions on a very successful parish council meeting held by the Devonshire Parish Council and hosted at the Elliot Primary School a couple of nights ago, where Ms. Kimberly Caines and Mr. Hil de Frias, a director at MJM Ltd., present ed an incredible presentation that edified those in attendance, and it was very well at-tended, on wills, powers of attorney, trusts, et cetera, et cetera, and on the on-going endeavours of the Devonshire Parish Council to serve the people of Devon shire. Not only myself, from this Honourable Chamber was there, but also Honourable Member Glen Smith was in attendance with his wife as well. And I think that we would concur that it was a very inform ative and most worthy annual meeting held by the Dev-onshire Parish Council. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Thank you. The Chair recognises Mr. G. C. Smith, De vonshire North West, you have the floor.
Mr. Glen SmithGood morning, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to congratulation Ms. Hannah Marshall, who was in the Royal Gazette this morning, on the front page, published new book, arts book, of UK’s best -selling band called One Direction. I have to say, the Marshall gene pool is very strong of …
Good morning, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to congratulation Ms. Hannah Marshall, who was in the Royal Gazette this morning, on the front page, published new book, arts book, of UK’s best -selling band called One Direction. I have to say, the Marshall gene pool is very strong of talented people and it starts from Dr. Marshall, who is also in the article t oday, as I believe the founding educator or built the foundation of Warwick Academy. Then of course, you have his son, Dr. Shane Marshall, who is a leading cardiologist; and then you have Mr. Chris Marshall, who was a founding member of ACE I nsured, CFO, worldwide, that created several jobs for Bermudians. And of course, his son Tim, who is a leading lawyer; and then, of course, the daughter, Ms. Kim Marshall, who is the [mother] of Hannah. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. House of Assembly
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Honourable Z. J. S. De Silva from constituency 29. You have the floor.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like the Honourable House to send congratulations and thanks to the Bermuda Blood Donor Centre for their summer blood drive. Due to this drive, Madam Deputy Speaker, we had 60 new donors that signed up this summer. And I think …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like the Honourable House to send congratulations and thanks to the Bermuda Blood Donor Centre for their summer blood drive. Due to this drive, Madam Deputy Speaker, we had 60 new donors that signed up this summer. And I think that is fantastic for the Blood D onor Centre. You will know that we have about 55,000 people that are eligible in Bermuda to give blood. And out of that total, we only have about 2 per cent that donate. So, to get 60 new members join up through this summer drive, we must thank Digicel as well, b ecause they offered us some nice prizes for al l those folks that donated during the sum mer to get a couple of phones. So I certainly, certainly would like con-gratulations to be sent to the Blood Donor Centre. And the Honourable Minister, Pat GordonPamplin, and also Minister Dunkley would like to be associated. We can never stop trying to get our pe ople to donate. Before I move on, Madam Deputy Speaker, I have to mention, too, that there are a lot of well -known athletes that donated for the first time as well. And I would encourage all of us that are involved with our youth, you know, to drive that point home because we never know when one of our loved ones, let alone one of us, may need a little bit of blood if we happen to come across the unfortunate—to have a serious acci-dent and need blood. On a happier note even still, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like congratulations to be sent to Janet “Pinky” Todd. You may be aware that during the summer, she retired from being a scorekeeper at Cup Match. She kept score for 30 matches, Madam Depu-ty Speaker.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaOh, well, I would certainly like to be associated with that. And I thank my colleagues, in my absence, for not letting that pass them by. She was certainly a fantastic . . . I do not know if it was mentioned last week, Madam Deputy Speaker, but she also …
Oh, well, I would certainly like to be associated with that. And I thank my colleagues, in my absence, for not letting that pass them by. She was certainly a fantastic . . . I do not know if it was mentioned last week, Madam Deputy Speaker, but she also had got her umpire qualifications. So Pinky has certainly shown her love for the sport of cricket. I am sure she will not be too far, even though she is sort of retired. And if it was not mentioned last week, I cannot let it go unsaid, the congratulations for the six -time marathon Bermuda champion, Mr. Ed Sherlock, and his wife Bernice, who celebrated 50 years of marriage over the summer as well. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Thank you. The Chair recognises Minister Dunkley, from constituency 10. You have the floor. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Just following briefly on the Honourable Member Zane De Silva in regard to the blood donor drive this past summer, like the Honourable Member, I …
Thank you. Thank you. The Chair recognises Minister Dunkley, from constituency 10. You have the floor. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Just following briefly on the Honourable Member Zane De Silva in regard to the blood donor drive this past summer, like the Honourable Member, I have been donating blood some time. And the first time I went, I was quite apprehensive about it. But the more you do it, the more comfortable you get. And I urge all Honour able Members to go try to give. So the funny thing is, I took my daughter with me earlier this summer. And when she got there, her platelets were just a little bit low, so she could not give. And she said, Daddy, you’ll never get me back again. But it is impo rtant. The clinic does a fantastic job of making you feel comfortable. You do not really even feel the needle going in anymore. And go during the time of day when there is something good you can watch on TV and afterwards enjoy a cookie and some apple juic e. But it is something we need in this small community, because you never know the demand for blood. And I think we should all suck it up and just go down there, Madam Deputy Speaker. Also, on a brighter note, I would like to ask this Honourable Chamber to send congratulations to 11 po lice officers, 5 who graduated from constable to sergeant: Karema Flood, Shakisha Minors, Shawnta’ Edmo nson, Wang Sonson, and Derrick Golding; and six who graduated from sergeant to inspector: Arthur Glasford, David Geraghty, Derricka Burns, Colin King, Scott Devine and Peter Stableford. The Honourable Member David Burt would also like to be associated with that. I had the pleasure of going through the ceremony, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I applaud the commissioner for making the ceremony something where family and friends can enjoy the celebration. I think that is very important. I would also like to be associated with the congratulations given by the Honourable Member, Mr. Blakeney, to the Devonshire Parish Council. I had the opportunity to go to the meeting they had the past Tuesday night. And certainly, they have a very vibrant and energetic council that I think is doing a lot of work for the mid- parishes on the Island, and they should be congratulated for doing what they have to do. And finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like this Honourable Chamber to send congratulations to young Alex Doyle, who was called to the bar last Friday. The Honourable Attorney General would like to be as sociated with that as well, and the H onourable Member, Mr. Glen Smith. Young Doyle is a constit uHouse of Assembly 2152 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
ent of mine and certainly joins in the tradition of his father of being a member of the bar. And I would like to wish him all the best in the endeavours ahead of him. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Transport, W. L. A. Scott, from constituency 24 . . . Sorry. Michael Scott. Hon. Michael J. Scott: [Constituency] 36, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerYou can tell that I am not using my normal layout here. [Inaudible interjection]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerI just need my own layout. Thank you. You have the floor. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise to be associated with the Health Mini ster’s offer of condolences to the family of Mrs. Ethel Lodge. I was sad to have learned of Mrs. Lodge’s …
I just need my own layout. Thank you. You have the floor. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise to be associated with the Health Mini ster’s offer of condolences to the family of Mrs. Ethel Lodge. I was sad to have learned of Mrs. Lodge’s passing, and I certainly want to be associated with offering condolences to Jeremy and Bryan and to Chris, and to Mary Lodge. Certainly, Mrs. Lodge and Mr. Arthur Lodge, a former police officer, they played a pivotal role in my and many of my friends’ coming up in Bermuda. We spent many happy days at their home, whether it was at the Herons Nest in Southampton, or wherever they were, over there at Witchery Lane, and now that she was over in Seven Sisters , where she spent her last days residing in Paget. So, to the sons of Mrs. Ethel Lodge, I offer and wish to be associated with the condolences on the pas sing of a wonderful mother, Mrs. Ethel Lodge. Thanks. May I be associated, Madam Deputy Speaker, with the congratulations offered up by the Minister of Public Safety to the movement of officers in ranks in the Bermuda Police Service. I am happy to be assoc iated with that progress in the service. Thank you.
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEA KER OR MEMBER PRESIDING
HOUSE VISITOR
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Before I recognise the next Member, I would like to recognise in Chambers, in the House, Reverend Dr. Leonard Santucci, former Senator. Welcome. [Desk thumping] The Deputy Speaker: Thank you. The Chair now recognises Mr. E. D. G. Burt, from constituency 18. You have the floor. CONGRATULATORY AND/OR …
Mr. E. David BurtThank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to ask the House to send a note of congratulations, and this note of congratulations would go to St. Paul’s AME Church on the celebration of their 128 th anniversary. But specifically, Madam Deputy Speaker, the St. Paul’s AME Church …
Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to ask the House to send a note of congratulations, and this note of congratulations would go to St. Paul’s AME Church on the celebration of their 128 th anniversary. But specifically, Madam Deputy Speaker, the St. Paul’s AME Church are recognising golden couples. And I would like to ask the House to please send a special note of congratul ations. They are recognising members of their church who are celebrating a grand 50 years of wedding an-niversaries. And although it is not typically the thing to give congratulations for anniversaries, 50 years is definitely a milestone. And there are two people in [par-ticular] that I would like the House to send congratul atory messag es to. The first (and I declare my interest) would be my uncle, Uncle George Leon Burt and Aunt Helen, who are celebrating their 50 th anniversary this year. And also a former Member of this House, and one of my constituents, the Honourable Stanley Mor-ton and his wife Ileys, celebrated their 50 th anniversary last month.
[Desk thumping]
Mr. E. David BurtSo I would ask that—I am sure that all Members would like to be associated with the message specifically to Mr. Morton, and we wish him and his wife many more years of happiness. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises Mr. Kenny Bascome, from constituency 1. You have the floor.
Mr. Kenneth (Kenny) BascomeI would ask that a letter of congrats be sent to the Bermuda Body Bu ilding Association, who just returned home, and they have done outstanding in the competitions that they just participated in. They received a number of medals. I would just ask that a letter be sent thanking …
I would ask that a letter of congrats be sent to the Bermuda Body Bu ilding Association, who just returned home, and they have done outstanding in the competitions that they just participated in. They received a number of medals. I would just ask that a letter be sent thanking them and congrat ulating them. House of Assembly
And, Madam Deputy Speaker, you should use my proper name so that these folks do not get bent out of shape: Kenneth. Thank you. Have a pleasant day.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMr. Bascome, I am sure they all know who you are, from constituency 1. Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Honourable D. P. Lister. You have the floor. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I …
Mr. Bascome, I am sure they all know who you are, from constituency 1. Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Honourable D. P. Lister. You have the floor. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise this morning—first let me associate m yself with a couple of remarks that have already been expressed. And one of those would be to the remarks of congratulations that was given to the blood donor assoc iation on the drive that they had this summer. I too have been a long- term, been on the donors list for quite some time, many years, Mr. Speaker now. So the drive that they did this summer was a successful drive, and I would like to recognise their continued effort, Mr. Speaker, in keeping our blood bank going.
[Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair]
Hon. Dennis P. List er: Mr. Speaker, I would also like to be associated with the remarks of my colleague who sits here in front of me, Mr. Burt, with regard to the acknowledgement of recognition for a former Member of this House, who will be celebrating—he and his wife will b e celebrating their 50 th anniversary, that of Mr. Stanley Morton, whom I had the privilege to sit in this House with, Mr. Speaker. And the milestone of 50 years must be recognised. But especially, I would just like to acknowledge Mr. Morton as one of our Members of this Chamber and give best wishes to him and his wife. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to ask this Honourable Chambers to join me in sending condolences to the family of the late Doreen Caesar. Mr. Speaker, you as a Somerset man would know the Caesar family and the Smith family, which Ms. Caesar comes from in Somerset. In fact, she will be funera lised this afternoon, Mr. Speaker. Her loss will be sur ely missed, not only by her family and her friends, but the Sandys community in general, and I speak specifically of her daughter -in-law, Ann, and her grandchi ldren and great -grandchildren. And our thoughts are with them at this time. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now recognises the Honourable Member from constituency 4, Hamilton East, the Deputy Speaker. MP Roberts -Holshouser, you have the floor. Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to send a letter of congratulations, or just at least extend …
All right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now recognises the Honourable Member from constituency 4, Hamilton East, the Deputy Speaker. MP Roberts -Holshouser, you have the floor. Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to send a letter of congratulations, or just at least extend verbally a letter of congrat ulations, to the reporter that this morning is in the Gallery covering today’s proceedings. This gentleman’s name is Owain Johnston- Barnes. There is an organisation that is called News eum, where over 800 newspapers submit their front - page articles. These articles are then reviewed. And for the first time, I believe, in Bermuda’s history, a st ory that was written by this journalist, Owain Johnston-Barnes, was numbered number 10. So I would like the House to rec ognise his endeavours and continue to encourage. While, of course, most politicians do not like reporters or their profession or their stories, we need to acknowledge when Bermuda is brought to the forefront. Sadly enough, the story was a sad story. It pertained to the massacre within the mall. So cons equently, while it was a sad story, Bermuda got world recognition. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. Any other Honourable Member care to speak to congratulatory? No other Member cares to speak. That concludes congratulatory and/or obituary speeches. MATTERS OF PRIVILEGE
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere are no matters of privilege. PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo personal explanations. NOTICE OF MOTIONS FOR THE ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE ON MATTERS OF URGENT PUBLIC IMPORTA NCE
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo notices of motion. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo introduction of Bills. And, Members, just before we go to the O rders of the Day, I am going to adjourn the House for 15 minutes while I deal with a matter before we move forward. So, at five past twelve, we will return to the floor of the …
No introduction of Bills. And, Members, just before we go to the O rders of the Day, I am going to adjourn the House for 15 minutes while I deal with a matter before we move forward. So, at five past twelve, we will return to the floor of the House.
[Gavel]
Proceedings suspended at 11:48 am
Proceedings resumed at 12:04 pm House of Assembly 2154 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Members. ORDERS OF THE DAY
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWe now move to the Orders of the Day. And the first Order of the day is the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013, in the name of the Minister of Tourism Development and Transport, the Hon-ourable and Learned Minister. Minister Shawn Crockwell, you have the floor. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwel …
We now move to the Orders of the Day. And the first Order of the day is the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013, in the name of the Minister of Tourism Development and Transport, the Hon-ourable and Learned Minister. Minister Shawn Crockwell, you have the floor.
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwel l: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move that the Bill entitled the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013 be now read the second time and committed.
Mr. E. David BurtMr. Speaker, I object to the Second Reading of the Tourism Authority Act 2013, pursuant to [Standing Order] 27(2), which states that “Every Bill shall be accompanied by a short explanat ory statement of its objects, and if it involves expenditure, a financial memorandum indicating the estimated annual recurrent cost …
Mr. Speaker, I object to the Second Reading of the Tourism Authority Act 2013, pursuant to [Standing Order] 27(2), which states that “Every Bill shall be accompanied by a short explanat ory statement of its objects, and if it involves expenditure, a financial memorandum indicating the estimated annual recurrent cost and any capital cost.” Mr. Speaker, this financial memorandum was not presented with this Bill. And I find it difficult to deal with the Bill. So, as per [Standing Order] 27(2), I o bject to the Second Reading, and I ask that you not allow the Second Reading until [Standing Order] 27(2) is complied with and a financial memorandum is sup-plied to the Members of this House.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, thank you for that, and I do understand your point. I have had . . . and the adjournment was so that I could have a meeting with the Leader of the O pposition to explain the position and the ruling which I have taken on our carrying …
Honourable Member, thank you for that, and I do understand your point. I have had . . . and the adjournment was so that I could have a meeting with the Leader of the O pposition to explain the position and the ruling which I have taken on our carrying on with this Bill. In fact, Honourable Members will note that , as precedent will have it, it has been taking place in this House, and no less than the Tourism Board Act last year was carried on in exactly the same way. So, therefore, I went in the back room to have discussion so it would not be necessary to go where we are going at this m oment. I took it upon myself to fully disclose my pos ition and what we thought. So I would ask that you r espect the fact that I have ruled that we will carry on with this.
Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Mr. Speak er, are we suspending the Rules to carry on this here? Because the Rules are the rules ; I understand about prec edents, the precedent . Right ?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: But once the Rules are in place —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, we can do that. We can suspend the Rules. If you like, we can certai nly suspend the Rules. But I want Honourable Members to be clear. And sometimes, we forget what happened just last year. And that is why the Speaker took his position for what has …
Honourable Member, we can do that. We can suspend the Rules. If you like, we can certai nly suspend the Rules. But I want Honourable Members to be clear. And sometimes, we forget what happened just last year. And that is why the Speaker took his position for what has happene d consistently. And if we want to go and . . . And, yes. This maybe has been over. But it has been . . . a precedent has been set. And we will certainly move . . . and I appreciate that we will move to this. We will improve and move to this. But, Honourab le Members, understand that the Speaker took the time. I was given this this mor ning. You know, I was given this this morning. It could have come to me during the week so that I would have had further time to explore it. But it came this morning! That in i tself was not good enough. So, therefore, Honourable Members, I would appreciate that we are . . . but the Honourable Member is correct in that. And I would like for someone actually to move that [Standing Order] 27(2) be suspended so that we can move on with that. And since we have had . . . and I had the decency to speak with the Leader of the Opposition. I would hope that the Opposition will abide and honour the position of the Leader of the Opposition, whom I had conversation with today. So, if I can have someone just move?
[Pause]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, will someone like to move that [Standing Order] 27(2) be suspended so that we carry on with this Second Reading? Yes? SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 27(2) House of Assembly Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: Mr. Speaker, I move in relation to the laying of this Bill, that [Standing Order] 27(2) …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you very much. It has been moved that [Standing Order] 27(2) be suspended so that we carry on with this Bill. All those in favour, say Aye ; those against, say Nay. AYES.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Ayes have it. [Motion carried: Standing Order 27(2) suspended.]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on, Minister. BILL SECOND READING BERMUDA TOURISM AUTHORITY ACT 2013 Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Bill before the House today seeks to establish a T ourism Authority. Mr. Speaker, in the current Government 2012 general election campaign platform, it pledged to create a …
Carry on, Minister.
BILL
SECOND READING
BERMUDA TOURISM AUTHORITY ACT 2013
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Bill before the House today seeks to establish a T ourism Authority. Mr. Speaker, in the current Government 2012 general election campaign platform, it pledged to create a T ourism Authority to better manage all aspects and elements associated with Bermuda’s tourism industry. The main thrust behind the decision to create a T ourism Author ity is to ensure commercial and strategic continuity in this vital industry. Throughout Bermuda’s tourism evolution, i nternal politics, national politics and institutional b ureaucracy all had a major impact on tourism and meant that spending plans, branding and even signa-ture events were all subject to the caprice of politics. The present Government’s model for Bermuda tourism consists of the department, the Bermuda Depar tment of Tourism, and the Bermuda Tourism Board. The Department of Tourism’s primary functions include hotel licensing, destination marketing and the coordination and sponsoring of local tourism - related events. The Tourism Board’s primary objective is strat egy development. And, with the authorisation of the Minister, the B oard can act as an agent for the Government for the transaction of any business con-nected with tourism enterprise. The recently enacted Tourism Board Act 2012 makes no legislative provision for a working relatio nship or collaboration between the Bermuda Depar tment of Tourism and the Tourism Board. Therefore, the current governing structure impedes both strategic and operational tasks being conceived, analysed and implemented by one body. We believe that this governing structure needs significant change to enable agile and efficient management of the tourism industry, which will allow the industry to be more competitive and, hence, more successful. Mr. Speaker, international tourism is growing at a fast pace. One just has to look at the Asian and Pacific regions to see how tourism is booming there. Bermuda must reclaim its position as one of the lea ding tourism countries in the world. We have vast tourism potential, excellent geographical and c limactic conditions, historical and cultural heritage, human and natural resources. It is abundantly clear that all the ingredients are here. Mr. Speaker, the turning around of our tourism industry is of great national importance. Bermuda’s tourism sector was once the key pillar of our country’s economy. But Bermuda tourism has effectively been in decline for over three decades. We have seen the number of hotel rooms shrink by more than 50 per cent. We have seen the number of airline seats com-ing to Bermuda significantly decline and the number of gateways r educed. We have seen the number of jobs in tourism disappear. And during these 30 years of decline, we continue to use the same methodology in trying to turn the industry around, and we have collectively f ailed. There is no one specific government or political party to blame. The reality is that politics got in the way of the effective management of tourism, and this must change. Tourism is far too important to be used as a political football. The temptation to manipulate num-bers or create desperate, ad hoc campaigns to give the illusion of tourism’s success for political expedien-cy must end. Mr. Speaker, we can look upon the revitalis ation of tourism from two main perspectives. First of all, tourism occupies an important place in the cultural renaissance of our Island. Through tourism, we can collectively embrace our history and culture. We can learn of the places of interest and our unique, exqui site beauty. We can learn of our historic figures, our traditi ons and our customs. In turn, we can educate and impart this knowledge to our children, Bermuda’s future torchbearers. When we all do this and embrace this mantra, not only do we become great ambassadors for Bermuda, we also engender that powerful factor c alled national pride . Secondly, and of no less importance in t oday’s economic environment, one can say the most important factor is that tourism is one of those indus-tries in which we can, if we establish a proper and effective way of doing things, achieve quick and i mportant results which will contribute to a broadspectrum economic revival in Bermuda—for example, the crea tion of much- needed new jobs. There is no disputing that a revitalised tourism industry in Berm uda can and will create new jobs for Bermudians, either House of Assembly 2156 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
directly or indirectly, with the provision of services and activities for tourists and tourism -related industries. If our tourism industry is successful, then Bermuda is successful. This is why the OBA Gover nment has made the creation of a Tourism Authority one of its main priorities. It is about turning around our economy, cr eating jobs for our people and reestablishing our rightful place in the world tourism market. Mr. Speaker, we need to have consistent and effective leadership in turning around tourism. I am the fourth Tourism Minister in four years. That is a recipe for inconsistency and instability, a glaring structural flaw of how we have historically managed tourism. I have no doubt that every Tourism Minister in the last five years or the last thirty years had Bermuda’s best interests at heart. The sincerity and commitment of successive Tourism Ministers is not the problem. The hard work and dedication of the staff at the D epartment of Tourism or the Tourism Board are not the problem . The problem is that our governance or structural model is deficient because it has had politics as its driving force. Mr. Speaker, the OBA Government believes that the creation of the Bermuda Tourism Authority is a better governing structure that will lead to the r enewal of our tourism industry. The Authority will be managed inde pendently; will be a modern and leading tourism enterprise, which will be dynamic, entrepr eneurial and vibrant. The Authority will be the singular voice that restores and evolves Bermuda as a worldclass tourist destination. It will develop creative and innovative ways to make Bermuda an attractive dest ination for visitors and tourism in vestment. The Authority will empower Bermudians to be customer focused, proactive, solution oriented, and make decisions that are in the best interest of Berm uda as a tourism destination. The Authority will partner with the Gover nment of Bermuda to meet the primary objectives to grow tour ism and to create jobs. The Authority will be results oriented, accountable and transparent to our stakeholders. Mr. Speaker, I believe that it is imperative that, collectively, the Government, the Opposition, the various stakeholders in our community join efforts to revitalise tourism in Bermuda. If we join hands and work together, we can take this industry to new heights. Today, I am not interested in apportioning blame or playing the blame game. I believe and ac-cept that my predecessor, the Honourable Wayne Furbert, did some good things whilst he was Tourism Ministe r. There is no question that the National Tourism Plan is an excellent blueprint to lead us to tourism recovery. The House of Assembly unanimously e ndorsed the Tourism Plan on the 29 th of June 2012. Over five months of collaboration went into the crea-tion of the Tourism Plan, and the final result was a pplauded by the whole community. The Tourism Plan has even been recognised internationally as . . . to my surprise and delight, a tourism consultant made reference to the Tourism Plan during the recent KPMG Infrastructure Confer-ence in Miami and stated that it was a plan that, if implemented, can reposition Bermuda as a leading tourist destination. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful to the Honourable Member, Mr. Furbert, for his leadership in the creation of the National Tourism Plan. The Authority will con-tinue to use and implement the Tourism Plan as its strategic model for success. Mr. Speaker, I also believe that the Tourism Board Act 2012 was a step in the right direction. My main criticism of this Act was the lack of independence of the board to manage and drive the tourism industry. At ev ery turn, there was the requirement of ministerial approval or political consideration. This is what we believe to be the primary impediment to a successfully managed industry. In addition, the Tourism Board Act 2012 failed to define how the Board and the Department of Tourism would work effectively together. This lack of a mandate and procedure for collaboration created co nfused lines of authority. These were my primary con-cerns, areas of concern. But as I stated earlier, I b elieve that this Act was a step in the right direction. Mr. Speaker, questions have been asked concerning the differences between the Act before the House today and the Tourism Board Act 2012. There are many si gnificant differences, and I wish to hig hlight some of the more salient ones. The Authority Act creates a new governance model for tourism which dissolves the Ber muda Department of Tourism and the Bermuda Tourism Board, thus creating a singular entity and voice that can restore Bermuda as a worldclass tourist destination. The Authority will not be subject to political changes of Ministers and Governments and will be able to manage its affairs without consistent political considerations. This is evidenced by generally reduc-ing the Mini ster’s oversight from that of approval to that of consultation. The Authority Act creates independence by a llowing the Authority Board to appoint its own me mbers. It is only the initial Authority Board appointment where the Minister has any significant influence. Thereafter, the Authority Board independently a ppoints its members. The Minister, however, retains the power to appoint the chairman. The Authority Act establishes a rotating board, which prevents the total dissolution of the Authority Board at any one time and allows for continual influx of new faces and ideas. This provides greater continu-ity and innovation by the Authority Board. The Authority Act does not allow for mandat ory selection of Authority Board members from the House of Assembly
Bermuda Hotel Association, the Chamber of Commerce and Bermuda Industrial Union, or for any ex officio members. These appointments are mandated by the Tourism Board Act. By eliminating these man-datory appointments, the Authority Board will be more agile and function more effectively. Members of these important stakeholder organisations will be involved in the tourism revitalisation process and consulted often. Our composition of boards research showed us that best practice for boards is to limit [their] number to no more than eight. Otherwise, it will be very difficult to reach consensus and be effective. The cur-rent Tourism Board had 20 members. The Authority Act does not allow for the r emoval from the Authority Board by just giving notice. The Mi nister can only remove a member for specific cause. The current position is too arbitrary and en-genders the p otential for political interference. This runs completely counter to an independent entity. Mr. Speaker, the principal objectives are a unique feature of the Tourism Authority Act in that they set out statutory corporate objects that govern the functioning and purpose of the Authority, which are used throughout the Act as a benchmark for governance and performance issues. The Tourism Board Act simply grants functions and powers without linking purpose to performance issues. The Tourism Author ity Act also pr ovides the statutory requirement that the Authority provide for much wider and more ambitious statutory objec tives, including the social and economic enhancement of Bermuda, education and training, the implementation and update of the Tourism Plan, t ogether with the requirement for sustainable develo pment of tourism, taking into account the size, env ironment, resources and population of Bermuda. The Authority Act mandates that a qualified full-time CEO is hired to manage the Authority, to work to further the principal objectives and drive the tourism industry. This CEO will be hired and held ac-countable by the Authority Board. The Minister will only be cons ulted. The function of the CEO under the Authority Act is clearly set out and is far more significant. The CEO will be the most important figure in the new go vernance model. The powers of the board contained in the Tourism Board Act are heavily curtailed by the need for Mini sterial approval. The Tourism Authority has far greater freedom and autonomy and is not subject to such Minist erial control. Ministerial approval is kept to a minimum and is only utilised when there is a clear need to safeguard public funds. The Tourism Board Act has limitations that prevent talented and suitably qualified Bermudians from becoming Board members or employees of the Board, and this blanket prohib ition on involvement with the Board is self -defeating. The mischief of potentia l self -dealing and corruption is dealt with in the Tourism Authority Act by a declaration of interest, which applies to any person who seeks to be employed by the Authority or act as a board member, or anyone so employed who is a member. Mr. Speaker, it is a fact that the Bermuda Tourism Authority will receive funding appropriated by the le gislature for the purposes and functions of the Authority. But the inaugural board and CEO will i mmediately be tasked to develop and implement a plan that will be the blueprint to lead and guide the Author ity along the path of self -sufficiency that will ultimately end at our desired state of full financial independence from the Gover nment. We are creating an Authority that will transform from dependence to independence, one that will be governed and operate based on a private sector model that will no longer require huge annual subven-tions. This is not only aspirational; it is achievable. However, until we reach the state of complete and full independence, the appropriate l evel of financial co ntrols, ministerial oversight and approvals have been applied to ensure the public’s best interests are pr otected. It is important that I highlight and emphasise that it is the intention for the Authority to be self - funding within the next three to five years, or hopefully, sooner. Some may say, If you are funding it, then you control it. That is not entirely the case here. The Bermuda Tourism Authority Act creates a manage-ment structure which allows the day -to-day dec isionmaking of the Authority, including how it spends its funds, to lie with the Authority board and the chief ex-ecutive officer. No approval is required from the Gov-ernment as it relates to the management of the Au-thority, but it is mandated that the Government is co nsulte d on certain matters and kept informed by the submission of the minutes of the board meeting every quarter. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to address r ecent statements and reports concerning the transitioning from the Bermuda Department of Tourism to the Bermuda Tourism Authority, in particular the issue concerning the current Department of Tourism staff. Contrary to recent statements in the print media, there will be no mass redundancies. I have publicly stated, and will reiterate to this Honourable House today, all employees of the D epartment of Tourism will have the opportunity to apply for Tourism Authority positions. Should employees not transfer to the Tourism Author ity, employment opportunities will be made available within Government Ministries and departments. My Ministry is currently working and will continue to work very closely with the Department of H uman Resources and the Bermuda Public Service U nion to ensure the transitional process is inclusive and transpar ent. As this is an on-going process, it would be inappropriate for me to provide any specific or ad-ditional details on this matter, other than to state that our Ministry fully understands and is cognisant of the House of Assembly 2158 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
staff’s concerns, apprehension and anxiety. And we will do our utmost to provide a smooth transition. The transition process will be managed by the recently created Executive Steering Committee [ESC], which includes the Chairman designate of the Tourism Authority, the Honourable David Dodwell; the Perm anent Secretary for the Ministry of Tourism Development and Transport, Mr. Francis Richardson; Ms. Jessica Mello, Director of Consulting at the DeLoitte and Touche, Limited; and Mr. Andrew Dias, the General Manager at the West End Development Corporation. The ESC will execute the office of the CEO during the transition period. Mr. Speaker, I consider it most worthy to acknowledge and personally thank the Department of Tourism staff for all of their hard work over the years. And I can attest to the high level of professionalism, commitment and passion that some of the staff possess and exhibit on a continuous basis. And for their efforts, our Ministry is most thankful. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the members of the former Tourism Board, Bermuda Hotel Association, the Chamber of Commerce and all stakeholders, corporation and ent ities that have given their time and have contributed to the Bermuda tourism industry. And we look forward to working with all of you as we enter into a new age and direction for the Bermuda tourism industry. Mr. Speaker, what we are embarking on today is historic. We are officially starting the process of changing the way we have managed our tourism i ndustry for the past 50 years. I appreciate that major change engen ders anxiety and fear. Change is also unpredictable. It is important that this Honourable House and the people of Bermuda know that this has not been a simple process. A great deal of thought and consideration has been put into the creation of the Bermuda Tourism Authority and how it will work to produce the best results for Ber muda. The dominant reality of our time is change. And the key to the economic survival of Bermuda in the coming years will be our ability to make bold changes and adapt to a changing world. Change is about making the difficult choices. We are now in a position where unless we undertake a radical reform of our tourism indus try, we will fail. And we cannot, Mr. Speaker, afford to fail. If tourism is successful, then Bermuda will be suc cessful. Mr. Speaker, implementing the legislative framework that empowers the Tourism Authority to carry out the principal objects and key tourism func-tions is the first step in ensuring that Bermuda once again becomes a competitive tourism destination of choice. And it will spur and encourage investment in new tourism products, create much- needed jobs and ultimately help to restore our economy. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
[Desk thumping] The Speaker: Thank you, Honourable Minister. I think we are at the point, and I would like to ask the Honourable Premier. I think, Honourable Member, it looks like it is lunch time.
Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move that we now break for lunch till 2:00 pm.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Premier. The House will adjourn to 2 :00 pm. [Gavel] Proceedings suspended at 12:33 pm Proceedings resumed at 2:02 pm [Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair] [Gavel] SECOND READING BERMUDA TOURISM AUTHORITY ACT 2013 [Continuation of debate thereon]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMembers , we will continue with the Second Reading of the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013 in the name of the Minister of Tourism D evelopment and Transport, the Honourable and Learned Member, Minister Shawn Crockwell, who has just completed his presentation. The Chair now recognises the Honourable Shadow Minister …
Members , we will continue with the Second Reading of the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013 in the name of the Minister of Tourism D evelopment and Transport, the Honourable and Learned Member, Minister Shawn Crockwell, who has just completed his presentation. The Chair now recognises the Honourable Shadow Minister for Tourism Development, MP Wayne Furbert, from constituency 6, Hamilton West. MP Furbert, you have the floor.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, just to remind our listening audience (for those who just probably turned on their r adio) that we are debating the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013. Mr. Speaker, I think we have all been waiting for this particular day in regards to the . . . first of all, let me thank the Minister for his presentation and for acknowledging the work done by the Progressive L abour Party over the last year or so in regards to two particular items, and those are the Tourism [Board] Act 2012 and the National Tourism Plan, which clearly was some hard work and, as you know, Mr. Speaker , [since] you formerly sat on the Tourism Board, that we believe that it was a milestone at that time in mov-ing the country ahead particularly in tourism. And we will be debating today the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act where the Minister says it is a game changer. And in some aspects there are some changes. I do not believe the changes are significant House of Assembly
enough to at least . . . where the Government probably spent about a half a million dollars to get some things done to make the Act work. And what I mean by a half a million dollars (in case anybody is wonder-ing what I am talking about) as the Honourable Mem-ber, the Minister of Health, will be aware of and Honourable Member, Adderley [ sic], recognise that as accountants we take consideration of those things that it took to develop or make a product. And so the . . . as a matter of fact, I am not sure if the Chairman should be talking to the Minister right there, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Thank you. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: It is interrupting. It does not work that way in this . . . as the former Minister would know. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: No, he was talking to the Minister. I do not —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, carry on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: And so the point is that to get from this point, because you know the OBA (the Government ) had the idea for years —for months, not years —but predominantly that it had the idea of pr oducing an independent Tourism Authority. As …
Yes, carry on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: And so the point is that to get from this point, because you know the OBA (the Government ) had the idea for years —for months, not years —but predominantly that it had the idea of pr oducing an independent Tourism Authority. As a matter of fact, I expected to see that word in the Act, “Independent” Tourism Authority, b ecause they said it so often. But they come here today with the word Tourism Authority Act 2013. So what I mean by half a million dollars, the cost to produce this particular Act, had to . . . when you inc lude everything, when you start with the . . . Mr. Corey Butterfield, the consultant, the cost for the lawyers to produce the document, the cost for travel, the cost for consultation, the cost for civil servants, the cost for . . . and it goes on and on. You follow what I mean. Why I am saying half a million dollars to produce such an Act, which we say is not significant . . . which is not significant. But again, we thank the Minister for recogni sing the work done by the former Government —the Progressive Labour Party Government —in producing the National Tourism Plan. And as you would notice, Mr. Speaker, that the National Tourism Plan plays a key role in the Tourism Authority because that is how basically the Government is saying we will use this Authority —the National Tourism Authority —to push our programme. And with some changes allows the Government to make some changes to the National Tourism Plan, but it is the foundation of where the Board will be operating out of. Mr. Speaker, I would say, and I am sure most people would say, that a Tourism Authority is not the panacea. It is not the panacea. And as much as we hear people saying about what the Authority would do, it is not the panacea that is going to, at the end of the day, bring in tourism. We are aware that, at the end of the day, it is our friendliness, it is our service, it is the infrastructure, it is new products. Mr. Thomas, who was waiting to do the work there up in Horseshoe Bay that was turned down by the . . . I do not know if it was turned down by the Board, but I remember Mr. Ha yward appealing the decision to do something up there, or whether who works out at Dockyard. All of those items have nothing to do with . . . at the end of the day, most of them have nothing to do with an authority or a board because the Government still (through Planning) will have to make a decision on whether an individual is allowed to do certain things. So the Government still has some basic controls over whether the tourism works. And that is all within the National Tourism Plan. It talks about new products. It talks about what the body should do in improving par-ticularly the numbers. Numbers, and as hoteliers know, the length of stay. Our biggest problem is not that we have a problem in the summer months because we do quite . . . well, hotels do quite well in the summer months and as I say the months of (I will take a guess right now) let us say May to September . . . June to September maybe . And the other months are kind of fighting it. We basically can hold probably, even with the number of rooms that we have, 2,500 rooms, 5,000 (I think it is) beds, we probably, if we multiply those numbers, we can hold over a million people a year, in theory. In theory, we could hold over a million people at the numbers that we have right now. Our biggest problem is that we are not fully occupied in those winter months. And so the National Tourism Plan talks about how we are going to deal with that and how we should approach it basically on sports tourism (and you, Mr. Spe aker, as the former chairman of looking at the sports product) and also on convention groups. And why I say that the Tourism Authority or body is not the panacea is because those things can be done under the Ministry. We have just got to make more people accountable in the Ministry going forward—hold the Minister responsible and those bodies. However, Mr. Speaker, let me just say up front that when we talk about a Tourism Authority, most people in Bermuda do not know what we are talking about. It sounds nice. It sounds fabulous —a Tourism Authority —as if there is something magical about that particular entity. Truthfully, it is not. It is just an entity. It is a body. There is nothing magical about the word “tourism” and nothing [magical] about the word “aut hority.” The real power is in the word “authority.” You have heard of port authorities, you have heard of parking authorities, you have heard of other author ities. And Government s give bodies, particularly cit izens, the right to work and operate within au thorities to get things done. And the reason why they do that is House of Assembly 2160 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
because in certain aspects authorities or an entity . . . and I called it a Tourism Board, we could have called it Joe Green’s Hamburger that operates tourism. My point is it was not in the name, it was in the contents of the Act. And we will get to that in some time. So it was not the name, but the word “author ity” has been used for . . . we have got Malta, we have got Barbados Tourism Authority, Aruba, Hawaii, Phi lippines, Samoa, Qatar, Zim babwe, Australia, South Africa, Guyana, Egypt. Do you think a Tourism A uthority is getting people [to travel] over there right now because of the Tourism Authority? I do not think so. I do not think so. So it is not the word itself or whether the entity is called a Tourism Authority. It is about a body getting on and getting the work done and giving them certain powers to make things happen. So there was nothing magical. Before 1998, all we heard was Tourism A uthority under the former Minister, David Dodw ell. It was not until the last year or two that we heard the word “independent” Tourism Authority. And I recall . . . I was trying to figure out what in the world this inde-pendent authority was all about because, fortunately enough, I had the opportunity to not spend a half mi llion dollars to create the Tourism Act. I probably cr eated it with $10,000 because it took me a weekend to show the comparison between the bodies and come up with the idea that . . . Hey, let ’s move ahead with the Singapore Tourism Bo ard, the Act ( because they called it a Singapore Tourism Board.) The contents of the Act were basically similar to everyone else. So that is how the words “Tourism Board Act” came up in 2012. We followed the Singapore model. So that is how we came up with it. But most people use the word “authority.” An authority is where a body is given the rights to get on with certain things that sometimes Government s are hindered to do or are slow -moving. Government s are red tape. We all understand that. And even I am sure that Ministers understand that sometimes it takes a long time for things to proceed. As they are aware (I am not sure in their room), but we had to basically get approval for anything over, I think it was $50,000. Cabinet had to approve it. This authority has been given a little more leeway to move a little quicker. And certain aspects of an authority allow it to sometimes save money. So there was nothing magical about this Tourism Author ity that I kept on hearing the OBA talk about, as if it was going to be the saviour to our problem here in Bermuda. Because a lot of the things that the Board had the right to do in 2012 to bring in tourism, Mr. Speaker , did not hinder them to [from doing] it. We are talking about the . . . well, we talked about an authority as an organisation having power or control to make things happen. We do not see where the significant difference that the Government has brought forward, as I have heard from the Minister — significant difference—and the Chairman talking about signific ant difference that will allow those tourism numbers to increase. If you were to say to me that the significant difference in the Act allowed the Board to . . . I do not know, but would show increase in numbers, I could understand that. But the powers that the Government is giving this Authority (and I say that entity) are not significant enough, as far as I am concerned, that it is going to make a major difference between the 2013 Act and the 2012 Act. Now, the Minister had said that we had 20 members on our Board (the 2012 Act), which is not true. The number of members that were on the Board was 15. The other members were ex -officio members, thereby . . . by the . . . and I will be quite surprised if the Board does not have certain ex -officio members comin g in from time to time, come in from time to time to give advice or to listen to them. Because at the end of the day they are not the ones who are on . . . for instance, the CEO is not a Board member. So I would have thought that he would be (he or she would be) coming to the boardroom from time to time as an ex - officio member to talk and discuss about what is hap-pening in tourism. That is why we had the directors on the Board as ex -officio members and why we had certain people, such as the person from overseas, and I think it was another member . . . but we only had 15. Now that was not a magical number, Mr. Speaker , because there was a report done in 1998 at that time by the Vancouver International Strategic Services Ltd. It was sitting there in the Minist ry and that is why I could not figure out why the Minister spent so much money in trying to produce an authority when the full report, at that time which was under the guidelines of the former Minister David Dodwell, was sitting there. And the whole report lays out how an authority should operate. In this report, Mr. Speaker, it talks about 15 members. Now you know why my 15 members came up. Now you know why the member of the union was on the Board because in this report it says a member of the union should be on the Board. Why? Because a lot of the BIU members work at the hotels. Why should a member from the Chamber of Commerce be on the Board? Because the report said that a member of the Chamber of Commerce should be on the Board , et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So it was nothing unusual. What we did, like I said, is take the Singapore Board Act, work with that, then we used the guidelines of what was happening in this Executive Summary to make things work. I mean basically what the . . . and I am not sure whether the Minister has seen this report, but it said in the introduction “to provide guidelines for drafting legislation to establish a new Tourism Author ity and to provide transition plans, which if implemented would ensure the orderly transition of the tourism function from a Government department to a Tourism Authority.” So I could not . . . that is why it bothered House of Assembly
me from day one why Mr. Corey Butterfield was hired particularly at that time it was announced to work on—
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member ? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Mr. Speaker , the Ho nourable Member is misleading the House and this happens time and time again as it relates to the employment of Mr. Corey Butterfield. Mr. Corey Butterfield was not employed sp ecifically and only for the …
Thank you.
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Mr. Speaker , the Ho nourable Member is misleading the House and this happens time and time again as it relates to the employment of Mr. Corey Butterfield. Mr. Corey Butterfield was not employed sp ecifically and only for the Tourism Authority develo pment. He had a wide remit and continues to perform a wide remit.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank y ou, Minister. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Okay. I am not going to debate the Minister on that. That is —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. That is acceptable. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am just saying that when I first heard the name Corey Butterfield, I remember him com ing before the House, particularly, outlining his role as working to draft up and do research on a Tourism Authority, hence, why he ended …
All right. That is acceptable. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am just saying that when I first heard the name Corey Butterfield, I remember him com ing before the House, particularly, outlining his role as working to draft up and do research on a Tourism Authority, hence, why he ended up in Barbados . . . the Bahamas. All right? A place which does not have a Tourism Authority. But he ended up there so . . . but that is fine. I am not saying that he did . . . all I am saying is that I remember clearly when I told the Minister at the time to go down the hall, around the corner, in the end of the drawer, you will find a report . And the report was there. So it did not need all that work done by Mello House and Jones , and KPMG, and this other consultant I see floating around . . . I cannot remember —
[Inaudible interjections]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I can’t remember. . . Mello . . . I don’t know if it is Jones. Mello— [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: That is right. I am thinking back to the old days. I forget the name of the company right now. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. POINT OF ORDER [Clarification] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Mr. Speaker , the Ho nourable Member is misleading the House. The law firm that was employed was MJM Limited and the consultant and—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSo that is a clarification. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: —the consultancy company was Ernst & Young.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thanks for the clarification. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I appreciate it. I appreciate the clarification. At the end of the day, there was a law firm — MJM—and an accounting firm —Ernst & Young, And there was another consultant I see floating around here recently that the Board …
All right. Thanks for the clarification. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I appreciate it. I appreciate the clarification. At the end of the day, there was a law firm — MJM—and an accounting firm —Ernst & Young, And there was another consultant I see floating around here recently that the Board has hired and it started with a “K” . . . I cannot even remember the name. But I am saying there are so many different groups out there . . . oh, well.
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Mr. Speaker, point of order.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. I do not know what he is tal king about, about another consultant that starts with a “K.” I think it is important if he is going to come to the House to make …
Yes.
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. I do not know what he is tal king about, about another consultant that starts with a “K.” I think it is important if he is going to come to the House to make these statements, he needs to be ac-curate in what he is saying, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, I think you are correct. Honourable Member , please, you know, be certain about what you are saying. Hon. Wayne L . Furbert: Okay, Mr. Speaker , yes . . . I am . . . I am really being nicer than normal. [Inaudible interjections and laughter ] …
Thank you, I think you are correct. Honourable Member , please, you know, be certain about what you are saying. Hon. Wayne L . Furbert: Okay, Mr. Speaker , yes . . . I am . . . I am really being nicer than normal. [Inaudible interjections and laughter ] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I have not raised my voice. I have not gotten upset. All I am saying is that —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo, you are doing— House of Assembly 2162 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: —there were a lot of consultants around. And whether it was . . . and I think it was hired by the Tourism Board. Okay? But there is another consultant out there, …
No, you are doing—
House of Assembly 2162 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: —there were a lot of consultants around. And whether it was . . . and I think it was hired by the Tourism Board. Okay? But there is another consultant out there, floating out there. As a matter of fact, they are the ones that are looking to the CEO. They are the ones looking into the CEO. Now who are they?
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Yes. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Mr. Speaker , the Ho nourable Member is misleading the House. We have only hired one consulting company and we have been clear. That was Ernst & Young. And we were clear that we hired a company to do a CEO search.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Minister, for that clarification. Honour able Member, if you could, please, just make sure that, you know, that you are clear. That you understand exactly who it is you are talking about if you are going to be . . . if you are going to …
All right. Thank you, Minister, for that clarification. Honour able Member, if you could, please, just make sure that, you know, that you are clear. That you understand exactly who it is you are talking about if you are going to be . . . if you are going to be ma king those comments.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Sorry, Mr. Speaker . I just want to clarify something. Did I . . . what did the Minister say about consulting? What did he say about hiring?
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: But that is what I said. [Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: B ut that is what I said. I said a consultant. What do you call those people?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Carry on, carry on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: That is what I was saying. Yes, that is what I said— [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes, that is what I said. They are not working for the Government . I said Ernst & Young and MGM . . …
Yes. Carry on, carry on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: That is what I was saying. Yes, that is what I said—
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes, that is what I said. They are not working for the Government . I said Ernst & Young and MGM . . . MJM (whatever they are called), and the consultant for them to hire a CEO —I said that. I am not misleading the House. This Minister is mi sleading the House because there is a group. All I am saying is that it is about up to $500,000- plus. So the major differences between the 2012 Act and . . . and in a minute we will get [into] a discussion of it, it is mainly the functions and powers of the Board. He talks about political interference and not wanting to . . . the fourth Minister in four years . . . I remember, I think in the UBP days we went through four Ministers in six weeks, that is how we were hopping through those days. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: No, it was not. It was not. And we have seen a decrease in tourism numbers and rightly so. He said it is not right to point fingers, and I remember them pointing fingers all . . . for the whole year last year. It was the PLP that did not have the answer to go forward. And so you are absolutely right, this is such an important topic that we should not be pointing fingers, we should find som ething to work together on. And as you know, Mr. Speaker , I have not been beating up the Minister over the last nine months, even when the stats —
[Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on. Carry on, carry on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I have not been beating up the Minister as much as the Minister was beating up on me over the nine months. Every time we talk about stats, he was always jumping in the paper. I do not jump in …
Carry on. Carry on, carry on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I have not been beating up the Minister as much as the Minister was beating up on me over the nine months. Every time we talk about stats, he was always jumping in the paper. I do not jump in the paper because I understand that. I under-stand what those numbers mean. I mean, I got a call yesterday from ZBM asking about something that came up from the statistical department. And I said, I am not going to respond to that. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes, I said I am not going to respond to that. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am not going to respond to that. I did not want to respond to the first quarter 2013 or the second quarter 2013 or third quarter coming up. I am not going to. Why? Because I understand the psyche, and why we need to find a way to move for-ward. Now they are saying by putting this Tourism Authority in place all of a sudden . . . fourth quarter, first quarter, second quarter 2014 we are going to see this massive . . . implying . . . implying. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: So they are . . . the Minister said that he has never said that, but implying that thi s House of Assembly
is going to be the panacea that is going to bring back . . . return and everything. No, it is not. And we have got to make sure that Bermudians understand that, because the expectation level is like, you know, the drop in the rates for foreigners to purchase homes to 6 per cent was going to cause some big move—it has not. I spoke to a realtor on Saturday at a “Feel the Love” concert, peace concert. He said, Wayne, there has not been much movement at all on that particular side. Now, on the PRC , there have been some changes, but not many coming from the overseas purchase to purchase. So it is the expectation level that we have got to ensure Bermudians . . . yes, we have got to build hope. Yes, we have got to ensure that things are in place to make sure things work. But do not give false hope that all of a sudden things are going to make a major change, as if the Tourism A uthority is going to make this happen. So it is mainly in the . . . the differences are when you talk about political interference. The M inister has the right to pick the chairman—the same thing that we had. And let me just tell you, he that controls the chairman almost. Mr. Speaker , you understand. You have a little luncheon in the afternoon and the chairman has a lot of influence over most boards. And you just cannot run from that. And the Minister has influence over the chairman. So I do not care whether Mickey Mouse picks the other five or six. If the Minister controls the . . . picks the chairman, he plays the tune of the Mini ster. Ini tially . . . the initial board is picked by the Mini ster in consultation with the chairman. I found that strange. Why in consultation with the chairman? So . . . and you are picking them for two, three and four years. So for at least two years, Mr. Speaker , you control the board because you put them in place. Any Minister knows that if you pick the chai rman, and you pick the board, you do not want to be twisting arms, but you could, you know, call them up for lunch and say, How are you doing? Something does not look right. That is how it works, not only in the political world, but it happens also in the real world out there. If I control 51 per cent of the shares of a board and now my chairman . . . you call him up and say, By the way, let’s have lunch. You understand that. And so you cannot say that you are . . . all of a sudden there is no . . . [that this] independent Board is going to operate. [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: So it is about . . . it is not about . . . all I am asking the OBA [is] to be a little more truthful on if we had something, a structure set in place that was so intertwined in influencing the Board . . . and the Chairman sits here right now. He will tell you, I am not going to influence the Board. And Mr. Speaker, you were on the Board, I never came in to the Board and said, Hey, Board, you have got to do this. I never did that . . . never did that. And they were from, I guess, from July to December. I never came in and said, Chairman, you have got to do that—no. And, no, you could not do that to a certain degree. So you have this picking of [the] Board. And then the Board then says, Okay, how will the next Board members be picked? Apparently, in the Act it talks about the Board members are elected by the Board members (who the Minister and the Chairman just picked), and in consultation with the Minister, the new Board members shall be appointed. So if your seed at the very beginning is in control, how do you think . . . as a matter of fact, those Board members do not have to resign because they could stay on. They can stay on. I do not think that the Chairman and the Mini ster are going to pick some insignificant Board me mbers. They are going to say, Well, let me pick insignif icant Board members now because I know in three or four years there is going to be another arrangement. It is not going to work that way. I can guarantee. I could probably name three of them that are going to be on the Board, first the Chairman— [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Mark Winfield. He is not g oing to be on the Board? I was surprised at that one. He must be the CEO.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberYou are batting zero still.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, leave those kinds of things out of it. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: So my point, Mr. Speaker, is that those Board members who are picked initially by the Board Chairman and the Minister will probably be there for years because they are not going to pick insignificant individuals …
Honourable Member, leave those kinds of things out of it. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: So my point, Mr. Speaker, is that those Board members who are picked initially by the Board Chairman and the Minister will probably be there for years because they are not going to pick insignificant individuals to make this work. Now, when we talk about functions and power of the Board (because that is where it operates), and who controls that, and there is implication of it in the 2012 Act. In their function and power, the 2013 Act talks about . . . I think they call it objectives and power of authority. Those principal objectives and powers of authority are no different in what we saw before. As a matter of fact, the Minister, currently (the Minister in 2013), has the right under the 2013 Act to make . . . “the Authority [may] undertake such other functions as the Min ister may” —may —“by written instrument, authorise the Board to carry out.” So the Board, certain functions that the Board may want to carry out, cannot be carried out unless the Minister approves it.
[Inaudible interjection] House of Assembly 2164 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes. Oka y? So this independence that we are talking about is now starting to crumble. A Chairman who is appointed by the Minister, a Chairman who . . . and the Board members appointed by the Chairman and the Minister, and now the power . . . the objectives and the . . . (I keep getting it wrong.) the objectives and power of authority —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou know we are going to go all through that when we get into Committee, right? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes, I know but we cannot . . . I—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Just give me a . . . I am not going over the clauses.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am generally talking about the Act itself. The Speaker: The general meaning of the — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes. I am just talking about the general [part of the] Act itself. That is what I am talking about.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Okay, okay. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: So the general part is that the Minister “may” —not “shall” —change some of the functions and power. If they do not want to change it, if Cabinet does not want to change it, so be it. The other part, Mr. Speaker, …
All right. Okay, okay. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: So the general part is that the Minister “may” —not “shall” —change some of the functions and power. If they do not want to change it, if Cabinet does not want to change it, so be it. The other part, Mr. Speaker, is the power . . . we call it the power of authority . . . the power . . . the power . . . please, give me one . . . function and po wer. There are certain things under the A ct that we felt it was important, and the Minister has now given them up to the Board. And those who are in the listening audience cannot tell me (and will understand this) be-cause the Board does not have the right without the approval of the Minister to buy shares in another company, will stop tourists from coming here. So under the 2012 Act, it talks about the Board has to seek approval from the Minister to buy shares. And, Mr. Speaker, you cannot tell me (and I am sure you understand that) that —
POINT OF ORDER Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. I do not know if I heard him correctly. He said that in the current, in the Act before the House, the Minister has to approve the purchase of shares. If that is what the Honourable Member said, it is incorrect.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAre you talking about this Act or are you talking about the . . . are you talking about the previous Act? [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: No, he is actually right. He is right. And I did not say that. I said that under the 2012 Act—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerRight, that is what — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Under the 2012 Act.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, he was talking about the 2012 Act. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Because everything under the powers of authority is basically the same, other than with the Minister (under the 2013 Act) does not have to approve where the Board approves to buy shares. Now what stops the Minister of …
Yes, he was talking about the 2012 Act. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Because everything under the powers of authority is basically the same, other than with the Minister (under the 2013 Act) does not have to approve where the Board approves to buy shares. Now what stops the Minister of the Board from buying shares in the Reefs? The Board . . . the Mini ster cannot stop him. The Board can buy shares in the property down here in St. George’s. It can buy shares anywhere from anyone at any time. But if the Go vernment is giving the Board $29 million or more, we thought it would be appropriate for the Minister to have some say on whether the Board should have the right to purchase those shares. It was checks and balances on accountability. That is what we are tal king about right now —accountability —on whether the Minister . . . the Board should go ahead and do what they want to do. But giving them that responsibility does not bring in tourists. Giving the Board the right to invest in and outside of Bermuda does not bring in tourists. But under the 2013 Act, the Minister has removed himself (or herself, himself now) . . . himself . . . themselves. So these little independent things they are talking about, do not bring in the numbers and increase the product as we think they should have. The Board had the responsibility under the 2012 Act to promote and market Bermuda for bringing in tourists. So from July 2012 up to now, Mr. Speaker, it was the Board’s responsibility —not the Minister’s — to promote and market Bermuda. I am not holding the Minister responsible for the numbers where they are right now. I am holding the Board and the Chairman because they had the responsibility. They had total responsibility for marketing and promoting Bermuda. As I said to them once (and he will confirm it), You can spend all your money on chewing gum if you want. We will give you the money that is allocated t oward the Board. But at the end of the day, you have House of Assembly
got to report to this House on how you spent your money and the House will hold them accountable. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: It is not the same thing. I heard the Honourable Member Grant Gibbons —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGo ahead, Member, you are giving your position so carry on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: It is not the same thing where the 2013 Act allows the Board to buy shares in Capital G and where we stopped it under the 2012 Act, where the Minister has the right to …
Go ahead, Member, you are giving your position so carry on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: It is not the same thing where the 2013 Act allows the Board to buy shares in Capital G and where we stopped it under the 2012 Act, where the Minister has the right to go back to Cabinet and Cabinet says, Minister, I don’t think you should allow the Board to go out and buy shares be-cause we are giving them $29 million. Under the 2013 [Act] that Board can do whatever it wants. But it has nothing to do with bringing in tourists. They have the right to lease and purchase land. This has nothing to do with bringing in the tourists. If these are the things they are talking about, [referring to] independent, then I am not . . . you do not have me. So we do not support the idea of giving the Board total carte blanche, [the] right to just go buy shares and purchase land and invest overseas wit hout the Government’s hand. No, you want to be independent in three years’ time, you bring back an amendment. You bring back an amendment in three years’ time when you said they will be fully funded. I will be interested to know how they will be funded. I am interested in that one. And I would like to know what the Minister . . . Give us an idea, what supports the idea of funding this Authority in the next three years? I just found that quite amazing. You are going to tax somebody. It is not coming from their hotels. Trust me. There ain’t no hotels that will be paying money into that Board. And when I . . . there are some other bets. So the Minister said that it would be totally funded in three years. I want to hear the Government . . . the country wants to hear how does that Board expect to fund that Authority in three years’ time? They will be (what is that word?) . . . they will be com-ing to Parliament for the next 10 years. They will be coming to the Parliament asking for their money and probably more too. If I remember, the magic word [was] of 40some million dollars that we were looking at. They will be coming back here. So three years? And the Mini ster says sooner. I would be interested. Now, if you are going to turn the tax over from the cruise line or turn the tax over from the hotels, that is not where they are funding it. We are giving them the money , because at the end of the day they are going to the Consolidated Fund to help out other projects. Now, unless these magical individuals —the Minister of Finance and the gurus on that side on the finance—understand where the money is coming from for that Board. I do not know any board, Mr. Speaker, that is funded by itself, any authority, without taking revenue from the Government that once had it. Any new revenue, I would like to know how they are going to charge. So do not tell me we are going to take the cruise ship money, and that is the funding. No, you are taking the money from the Consolidated Fund who could help some people who are living and not wor king. So we do not support that idea. We do not sup-port the rights . . . we support an entity to move things ahead. We support that. But we do not support where the Government is limiting . . . and it is not really control, but holding the Board accountable for the money they are giving them. We do not support that. I think that is where the differences are. I will wait to hear from anyone that wants to stand up and tell me . . . not the fluff. I do not want to hear the fluff about these . . . I want to hear specifically what are those things that were so amazing. And I have already pointed out those things that are differ-ent. Now, Mr. Speaker, we are handing assets over to this Authority. This Parliament, this Honour able House, gave the Board the right to form a body last year called the Tourism Board. They had the right to be sued; they had the right to collect money, and so on and so on. Now this Parliament is handing over — giving this Tourism Authority a new name, just a new body, a different body of people—the assets of the old Board. Well, shouldn’t they come to this Parliament and tell us what those assets were that we are hand-ing over? They collected money —2.5 per cent —of the tourism fee. I am interested to know what liabilities are out there that the Board had. They had the right to report to Parliament. As a matter of fact, their financial year was March 31, 2013. So they have had time to at least give a preliminary financial statement to the Minister. So under the Act they have the right to give the fina ncial statements to the Minister. As of March 31, 2012, I want to know what the assets were. How much cash did this Tourism Board have? What liabilities were outstanding? Is anyone suing them? Does anyone owe them any money? This Parliament has a right to know that before we hand over a cheque. Should only the Minister know what the assets are? He had to r eport to Parliament within . . . by September 30 th. By now I would have thought, because Se ptember 30th is three days from now (I think it is three days from now) he should have the financials sitting there on that desk telling us how much cash the Board has and which hotels have not paid their fee. So I ask the Minister, how much cash does the Board have as of August? Or whatever the latest statement he can give. And what hotels have not paid their tourism fee? Because the tourism fee did not come from the hotels, it came from the tourists. House of Assembly 2166 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
So they collect the money on behalf of the tourists, and have they paid the money into the Board? We want to know that from this Parliament. Mr. Speaker, I have got, what? Probably 15 minutes to go? Eighteen? This CEO concerns me. When I read the ad in the paper, I was waiting to read the bottom line saying Bermudians need not apply —need not to apply. What are we . . . what have we come to, Mr. Speaker? What have we —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI missed that, what were you . . . Hon. Wayne L. F urbert: The ad. They took a big ad in the Bermuda Sun today , as if they were impressing me or the Bermudian public —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIt was in the paper a few days. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: —that were advertising for a CEO.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. Wayne L. Fu rbert: And the CEO had so many qualifications, all right? Requirements. At the bottom, I was waiting to read, Bermudians need not to apply . After all, the best practice . . . let me just tell you, if we did the best practice many …
Yes.
Hon. Wayne L. Fu rbert: And the CEO had so many qualifications, all right? Requirements. At the bottom, I was waiting to read, Bermudians need not to apply . After all, the best practice . . . let me just tell you, if we did the best practice many of us would not be in this Parliament. If the qualifications for the CEO are what [they are], then why should not the Minister of Tourism meet the same qualifications? [Inaudible interjections and crosstalk]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on, carry on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Mr. Speaker, are you follo wing me on this? [Crosstalk] [Gavel] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: All I am saying to you [is] that after all these years —hundreds of years —we are not proud to know that there is a Bermudian out …
Carry on, carry on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Mr. Speaker, are you follo wing me on this? [Crosstalk] [Gavel] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: All I am saying to you [is] that after all these years —hundreds of years —we are not proud to know that there is a Bermudian out there, who is a qualified CEO. Cannot run tourism. Here is what they do, Mr. Speaker, they talk about the person has to have financial management and then they talk about travel and tourism experience and a few other things. You are trying to tell me that Bill Gates could not be the Minister —the CEO —of the Tourism Authority? You are telling me Brian Duper-reault could not be the Minister of this Tourism Author-ity? Are you telling me that Gil Tucker could not be the Minister of —sorry, the CEO —of this Tourism Author ity? Are you telling me that the many top CEOs that we have on the Island are not qualified because they do not have travel and travel experience? Something is wrong there, Mr. Speaker. Most CEOs do not have to know everything. They have to know some things, but they have other people to give them guidance. (I almost started picking on the Permanent Secretary, but I am not going to.) Not ever ybody has to know that. You do not have to know that. Mr. Speaker, it is ludicrous that at the end of the day, I guarantee— I guarantee—that the CEO that comes in will not be a Bermudian. And they are not . . . they advertised in the Bermuda Sun or the Royal Gazette just to do it. But that head- hunter is not looking in Bermuda. If they are, where are they? They are overseas looking worldwide. Why do we not just do headhunting for every job in Bermuda? Every job in Bermuda . . . t he clerk. You know, why do we not go and find somebody in Timbuktu, because there is somebody always overseas who is better than a Bermudi an—always. But, you know, most countries have their own people as CEOs. [Crosstalk] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Most people have their . . . and what message are we sending to our people? What message are we sending to our people? We are not smart enough. We are not . . . we are not . . . you know, you have not reached that standard because you are not . . . we can always find somebody better than you. Mr. Speaker, I am telling you that the message that is being sent by the OBA Government is wrong. It is wrong. Because when we start believing in ourselves, we are going to find this country going in a better direction. But until we hold on to the thing that people outside are better than us, except the Minister . . . I mean, you have got to tell me why there is a Mi nister of Education. I am not going to go into that part. I am going to talk about tourism today. But you cannot . . . cannot . . . I accept that the person has to have some smarts about them-selves. And I can guarantee, Mr. Speaker, I will ask them to report back to this Parliament how much money t hat person is making and what are their full benefits? If it is less than a half a million dollars, I will be surprised. I bet you that if it were a Bermudian, you would only offer them $100,000 and say that is all they were worth. But anybody from overseas is worth more. But the day we start believing in ourselves that we as a people can do anything . . . we taught people how to do tourism. We taught people. But yet we are saying, No, we have got to go overseas and find somebody who has all these skills and who does not even know where Beanie’s Bay is. But they are going overseas to sell Bermuda. They are going to sell Bermuda [although they] do not know anything about Bermuda. Am I missing something? House of Assembly
And then you are going to ask some Berm udian to come along and help and whisper, Hey, Shelly Bay is down at Shelly Bay. And he gets up to make a speech on how good Bermuda is. Probably the first time he has put his foot in the House and he is going to be a CEO of this Authority. If there is anything that is more sickening to me . . . everything else I can live with, but to send a message that Bermudians are not qualified, I am sick and tired of that.
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am sick and tired of that. [Crosstalk] [Gavel]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMembers, quiet. Carry on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Mr. Speaker, my record speaks for itself. [Crosstalk] [Gavel]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Listen. Member, sit down. Sit down. Sit down, please. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Did I do something wrong? The S peaker: No, you did not do anything wrong. You did not do anything wrong. Maybe now they are ready. Carry on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes, I was …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIt was not you. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my record speaks for itself. When I was on the [Bermuda] Hospitals Board, it came down to whether the CFO should be a Berm udian or somebody from South Africa. I had the vote. Do …
It was not you. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my record speaks for itself. When I was on the [Bermuda] Hospitals Board, it came down to whether the CFO should be a Berm udian or somebody from South Africa. I had the vote. Do you know who I put my bet on? A Bermudian. When I was the Minister of Tourism, of Transport, and we had a fellow down there, I told them to put a Ber-mudian in charge. I did not care; he could be in the background. He could be a consultant. But I want a Bermudian standing up front there. And it happened. So I am saying to you, I mean, if the person needs to have finance, management, [and] travel —you might as well pick the Premier because he has all of those.
[Crosstalk] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: And I am not being fac etious. What I am saying is that I believe that if the CEO —the top CEO —of the country is the Premier . . . and by the way, when he leaves office (based on our experience [with] most of them) . . . it is not going to work. In other words, if you can run the country, he cannot run an Authority? And get his Ministers and get his directors and everybody else who understands finance and health and tourism, and whatever . . . that is how . . . a CEO does not have to know everything. So I am sending a clear message to the Chairman, who I am sure is already looking for that CEO, and the Minister, because that head- hunter is out there looking all around besides on North Shore— [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Besides on North Shore. They are not here. They are overseas. Because at the end of the ad it says, Bermudians need not apply. Mr. Speaker, in summary, we on this side do not support a CEO who is not a Bermudian. We do not support the total powers given to a Board which has no connection and accountability to the people . . . and those things I am talking about are buying up shares, investing money, having the right to invest money here and there without the Minister’s approval, and some other things which I am sure the Minister will see when we get into Committee. Those things we do have great concern over; the general premise of an entity making things work. And we are concerned about the staff. The Minister has given us that assurance that the staff will be okay. I just find it strange that if none of the me mbers qualify . . . and you know what makes me smile about that, Mr. Speaker? It was never the staff at the bottom who were clipping the paper, who made the decision about tourists coming here. It was always the top level who made the decision on policies. So whether I am in there booking in accounts, or whether I am in there seeing whether the person who is doing the graphics, or whether the person is attracting some people here for the sporting . . . a lot of the decisions are made at the top. But . . . I probably put my . . . I am not putting my life on it, but there are certain people I know that are probably going to still be there. I will be interested to know whether the person who is in the New York office will still be there—a non - Bermudian. I always felt that a Bermudian could take that spot. I always felt that a person from Canada— nonBermudian— a Bermudian could be in that spot. I always felt that some of the people in the London office could be Bermudian. And we were working on those things. I guarantee that their heart is not beating as much as the Bermudian staff here. House of Assembly 2168 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
I went to the Immigration Office the other day and I said, I want a work permit. She said, Why? [I said,] Because work permit holders get a job faster. So my point is that there is something wrong with us — there is something wr ong with us, Mr. Speaker, that after 400 years our children and our grandchildren do not have the ability to believe that their leaders are going to take care of them. And you are wondering why we have problems the way we have it? Well, just keep on going that way. Mr. Speaker, I am not a prophet, but I can tell you right now if we do not start believing in ourselves and are building hope for our people that they can do anything they want —whatever —whether they went to school at Francis Patton or they went to school at Sandys or they went to school on St. George’s or they went to school up at Saltus —if they are Bermudians, they should feel that they can come here and be able to get a job if they are qualified. I understand that there is a time, that there are some needs and some training that has got to take place. I understand all of those situations. But once we arrive . . . we are Parliamentarians, Mr. Speaker, we are big time. People put us here. Why? To make sure that the people are protected, to make sure that things are going right, to make sure that the future is bright. But based on this move . . . based on this move . . . this move is not . . . I can probably guarantee, [the] CEO is not a Bermudian. We still have that person sitting there in the New York Office. They will probably move him now, now that I have said it.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Beg your pardon? Mr. Speaker, I am not going to get into that discussion. [Inaudible interjections and laughter]
Hon. Wayne L. Fur bert: I am not going to get into that discussion. The Minister . . . Who put him there? I just know that there are certain people who are currently sitting on your Board who have encouraged me to keep them there, who asked me to keep them there. So, Mr. S peaker, I believe that we have to build hope. And the one thing that if we do not get it right —and that is hope for our future —our people will live in de spair, and somebody is going to come and bite us where we do not want to be bitten. Thank you, Mr. Spe aker.
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now will recognise the Honourable Member, Mr. G. C. Smith JP MP, from Devonshire North West, constituency 14. You have the floor.
Mr. Glen SmithThank you, Mr. Speaker, and good afternoon.
Mr. Glen SmithI stand here today as I am strongly in favour of tabling this Bill today. And I also applaud the Minister and the One Bermuda Alliance Government for taking these bold and courageous steps that need to be taken in order to put tourism back on the map. The Honourable …
I stand here today as I am strongly in favour of tabling this Bill today. And I also applaud the Minister and the One Bermuda Alliance Government for taking these bold and courageous steps that need to be taken in order to put tourism back on the map. The Honourable Member, the Shadow Mini ster of Tourism, said that it has been projected that this will be the panacea that is going to save the tourism. Well, Mr. Speaker, if we do not do something or try to do something, then we will have nothing in the end. And no one has ever said that this is going to be the silver bullet that saves tourism. It is going to be a combination of many things. And anyone can see today that the way that we have been operating is not working. It is broken. We need to have a whole new fresh look at the way that we run our business and the way that we do things. We have seen over numerous years the hotels closing down during several different administr ations —from the UBP, to the former Government, to today. We have all seen hotel occupancy dropping down. Mr. Speaker, I remember many years ago . . . in actual fact, my first business was to be a horse and carriage driver on Front Street. And I remember hack-ing on Front Street, Monday through Thursday, once that cruise ship left, we all used to try to get a little pick up at the Bermudiana Hotel and maybe get a little fee up to Flavours to drop tourists off there and what have you.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThat is a long ride.
Mr. Glen SmithWell, it is but — [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Glen SmithI most certainly did, Mr. De Silva. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Glen SmithThat is what I — [Inaudible interjection and crosstalk]
Mr. Glen SmithThat is when I used to work . . . it was in the evenings because I did have another full - time job during the day. But the point of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that we have all lived and have seen House of Assembly these hotels go …
That is when I used to work . . . it was in the evenings because I did have another full - time job during the day. But the point of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that we have all lived and have seen House of Assembly
these hotels go out of business and they are not around today. And I was fortunate enough to be in the tourism industry because I do not think I would be standing here today, because that was the base that put me on the map in regards to starting businesses. I woke up this morning and before I came here I was under the impression that 10 per cent of the GDP was through tourism, but according the Royal Gazette this morning it is 5 per cent. So, Mr. Speaker, we do have to make changes. The world is changing and we compete in a global market. Many years ago I remember my grandparents used to take college students in in their home and then when they could not take them the overflow would come to our home (as a child) and we would accommodate them because there were a lot of col-lege students coming to Bermuda and our hope was that those college students would return— which they did for a time—they would come back to Bermuda and spend their time as they got older in repeated trips. But the world has changed. We as travellers have changed. We all know that today. I personally, certai nly, do not go back to the same jurisdiction. The world is your oyster and Bermuda is no different from the rest of the world, in that we have to be able to sell something differently. And, unfortunately, the net loss was net loss of jobs, with housekeepers, landscapers, cruise tour operators, and so forth. And we have seen it and it has been failing and continues to fail. What we have in this Act today, Mr. Speaker, to me, the way I look at it, is a real business plan. And why I say it is a real business plan, [is that] I look at the way that it has been written and what is in this plan and, to me, I almost equate it to how Bermuda should be run —as a Fortune 500 company. That is what we should be running it as. And how are we going to do that? Well, this Act certainly helps that. When I look at the previous Act of 2012 versus this Act, and the Honourable Member talked about the Board members. Well, nowhere . . . anywhere in the world, particularly in the Fortune 500 companies, do you have 20 board members. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWhat is the point of order? POINT OF CLARIFICATION Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: The Honourable Member is misleading this House.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWhat is the point of order? He is not misleading? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: H e is misleading the House.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHe is not misleading the House. What is your point of order? Misleading how? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: We do not have 20 board members.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWell, then you give a point of correction. Correct him. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: It is a point of order.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, but you are correcting him. Right? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. All right, so a point of clarification. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Do I do a point of correction? It is a point of order.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou are making a point of clarification that he is . . . all right? Yes. All right. Thank you, Honourable Member Furbert.
Mr. Glen SmithThank you and I will accept that four ex officio members were in that, and I guess he did say 15, bu t according to the Act it was 16 members that he could have up to as board members. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Glen SmithSixteen. That is what it states. [Inaudible interjection]
The SpeakerThe Speaker—and make your presentation.
Mr. Glen SmithI am including the ex officio me mbers in there, but I will accept what the Honourable Member said. [Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on, Honourable Member.
Mr. Glen SmithThank you. As I mentioned in regard to boards, particularly the Board that the 2013 Act has, [it] has eight me mbers. And the good news is that we will be looking for credible individuals that have a full understand ing of not necessarily being in tourism, but having a …
Thank you. As I mentioned in regard to boards, particularly the Board that the 2013 Act has, [it] has eight me mbers. And the good news is that we will be looking for credible individuals that have a full understand ing of not necessarily being in tourism, but having a strength, maybe in marketing, a strength, perhaps in finance, and a strength in travel and development that will be participating on these boards. House of Assembly 2170 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Then we want to talk about the CEO. The ad that is in the paper today in regard to the Bermuda Sun does not discriminate that Bermudians cannot apply for that job. It never says that at all.
[Inaudible interjections]
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberUnless you read the fine print.
Mr. Glen SmithWell, even if you read the fine print, it does not say that. And at the end of the day I will . . . what the Minister said is that we will hire the best for this pos ition in order to take this country forward. And that is …
Well, even if you read the fine print, it does not say that. And at the end of the day I will . . . what the Minister said is that we will hire the best for this pos ition in order to take this country forward. And that is what we intend to do. We have to remember we are competing in a global market, not just in a small fish bowl anymore. Mr. Speaker, if I look at Aruba (where they have privatised their Tourism Authority), they are now running at 78 per cent occupancy. [Crosstalk]
Mr. Glen SmithAnd they also look at Singapore (t hat has been extremely successful), Britain, Puerto Rico, and Hawaii. So essentially we will be creating a $30 million enterprise of qualified, highly creative, self - motivated, and business savvy individuals that will be on this Board. Mr. Speaker, it is about getting …
And they also look at Singapore (t hat has been extremely successful), Britain, Puerto Rico, and Hawaii. So essentially we will be creating a $30 million enterprise of qualified, highly creative, self - motivated, and business savvy individuals that will be on this Board. Mr. Speaker, it is about getting Bermuda back on track and putting Bermuda on the map to become a preferred destination that will get Bermudians em-ployed and working again. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from Pembroke Central, constituency 17, the Shadow Minister of Education, MP Walton Brown. You have the floor.
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Mr. Speaker, and good afternoon colleagues. Mr. Speaker, I just have four points that I would like to make about this Tourism Authority Bill. The first has to do with the redundancy which the Government has already spoken to. Mr. Speaker, you will know that last year the …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and good afternoon colleagues. Mr. Speaker, I just have four points that I would like to make about this Tourism Authority Bill. The first has to do with the redundancy which the Government has already spoken to. Mr. Speaker, you will know that last year the One Bermuda Alliance party made a very clear statement that there will be no Government redundancies and there will be no loss of jobs. That statement was made emphatically and r epeatedly. What we have before us today, Mr. Speaker, are approximately 40 Government employees b eing made redundant, without any shadow of a do ubt. This is a violation of a solemn undertaking that the party made prior to the election. I think, Mr. Speaker, it does not bode well for other Government departments as Government seeks to— Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order, Mr. Speaker —
Mr. Walt on Brown— make some amendments. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: —or point of clarification.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. POINT OF CLARIFICATION Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Mr. Speaker, I understand what the Honourable Member is saying in terms of the position— the role that the employees currently perform will be made redundant —obviously; we are abolishing a department. The promise was that no jobs would be lost or …
Yes.
POINT OF CLARIFICATION
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Mr. Speaker, I understand what the Honourable Member is saying in terms of the position— the role that the employees currently perform will be made redundant —obviously; we are abolishing a department. The promise was that no jobs would be lost or no employment would be taken away. Every individual will remain employed, either in the Tourism Authority or in another department of Government. So if the Honourable Member wants to play with words —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, that is — Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: —the fact of the matter is that employment will be—
The SpeakerThe Speaker—that is a clarification. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: —protected.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThat is a clarification in terms of what you said. Member, do you understand that?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right, carry on. And you can have your opinion and your right to have whatever opinion you want.
Mr. Walton BrownI can have my opinion and I also have the right to state facts, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Walton BrownAnd the fact is that 40 positions, approximately, have been made redundant. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Positions, yes.
Mr. Walton BrownThat is my point. And the Minister will accept that. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes.
Mr. Walton BrownThank you. And as I say, it is precedent setting. And the Minister will also accept, Mr. S peaker, that that is in House of Assembly direct contradiction to a solemn election promise that was made. [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Walton BrownAnd the Minister can disagree and so too can the Premier. That is why we are here to have debate, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the second point is that a great deal of thought, a great deal of work has gone into this notion of what the former . . …
And the Minister can disagree and so too can the Premier. That is why we are here to have debate, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the second point is that a great deal of thought, a great deal of work has gone into this notion of what the former . . . what the Member from constituency 14, who just sat down, said concerning privatisation. A great deal of thought has gone into it. And, Mr. Speaker, the notion of privatisation does not in and of itself create a better set of policies or pr ogrammes. Those who believe in privatisation have a particular ideological outlook on the world. They believe that the private sector always does things better. It is just a fundamental philosophical belief that they have. And I can respect that that is a belief that is out there. The reality, of course, will show that the private sector, left to its own devices, create havoc in many jurisdi ctions. And the last round of financial collapse has shown what kind of havoc can in fact be created by having the private sector run everything as if they un-derstand fully how things should be done. Mr. Speaker, so this is an ideological position taken by the Government. And no doubt they will look at other areas in Government by which to make these further privatisations. And their tool then, Mr. Speaker, will be other positions that will have been made r edundant. So we will see a further escalation of redun-danc ies in Government. But, Mr. Speaker, the challenges in tourism will not be fixed by the particular structure of a Tourism Authority or Tourism Board. That is just a vehicle for dealing with certain types of issues. The problems in tourism go way beyond whether it is privatised or Government run. We have long- standing challenges in tourism which this legislation by its design is not meant to address. Our decline in tourism began (many would agree) immediately in the period of the 1980s, for any number of reasons. And we can all de-bate what those reasons are. Part of it was the easy and rapid money that came with international bus iness and so [there was] less of an emphasis on tourism. But it began in that period nevertheless. But today, Mr. Speaker, we face a series of structural challenges, issues of service in our tourism sector, a lack of initiative being shown by hoteliers. Mr. Speaker, if you are paying $500 a night for a hotel room and do not get wireless Internet, you are going to question whether you are putting your money in the right place. And I have had clients who were in Bermuda who were paying $500 and did not have wir eless Internet. So there is a question about the product. This Tourism Authority is not in and of itself going to address that. That is a matter for the hotels to address. You see part of the challenge is that hotels by and large do not market themselves. For decades they have relied on Government funding to market their business. If free enterprise and private enterprise is the best vehicle, then why were they not doing it? I know one hotelier who does a great deal of marketing on his own, Mr. John Jefferis at Coco Reef. And I know that as Chairman of Bermuda College for four years we saw the Coco Reef development (which we managed indirectly) turn a profit because he put a lot of investment in direct marketing of that hotel. Other hotels seem not to do that. So there are long- standing systemic problems. There is the issue of wage dispar ity which gives young people a disinclination t o be i nvolved in tourism. So if you are going to address it and revitalise tourism, we need to look at the totality of the issues. This Tourism Authority, as I read the Act, is focused primarily on marketing. But how effective is your marketing going to be if your product, if your service, is not up to the standard for the prices you are going to charge? So let the Government have its pr ivatisation. That, in and of itself, Mr. Speaker, is not going to lead to an improvement in our tourism prod-uct. Mr. Speaker, the third point I want to make r elates to the structure of the Board. This Government intends to give $30 million of taxpayers’ money to this private entity (as it was described by my colleague) — $30 million!
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberApproximately, $30 million.
Mr. Walton BrownThat is why I used the word a pproximately. Mr. Speaker, the legislation that we have b efore us allows for the Board to fund private enterprise. Up to a million dollars can be given to a company without any involvement of the Minister. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Walton BrownSo if you are talking about good governance and transparency, this is in direct contr adiction to that. If I was a cynical person (and I am not normally cynical, but if I was a cynical person), I would say that this is an OBA rendition of Friends and Family, …
So if you are talking about good governance and transparency, this is in direct contr adiction to that. If I was a cynical person (and I am not normally cynical, but if I was a cynical person), I would say that this is an OBA rendition of Friends and Family, because you can give money to a company up to a million dollars without any oversight or approval by the Minister. So I am concerned about that. And if this is a false interpretation, I am hoping the Minister will e xplain that in his response. I am happy to be wrong on this matter, Mr. Speaker. I will be happy to be wrong. Mr. Speaker, my final point has to do with the selection of the CEO. Mr. Speaker, we have been in the tourism business since 1883 when Princess Louise, the wife of the Canadian Governor General, House of Assembly 2172 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
came to Bermuda to convalesce. The reporters who accompanied her wrote glowing reports about Berm uda. Bermuda was put on the map from a tourism standpoint as a result of that visit. And from 1883 up until the 1980s, we had a reputation as an upscale jurisdiction that delivered quality service with a quality product. We have more than 100 years of experience in successfully running tourism. It troubles me, Mr. Speaker, that we cannot have a clear statement from this Government that the next CEO of the Tourism Authority will be a Bermudi-an. Because if there is one thing we have right, it is the running and experience of running tourism. We understand this better than most people. Our cha llenges are structural. It is not because of the fault of any individual. We have structural challenges that need to be addressed. And I do not believe that an yone can sell Bermuda better than a Bermudian who has demonstrated knowledge and interest in our tourism product. So, Mr. Speaker, I will encourage this Go vernment, despite the concerns that you have about Bermudians being able to fill a range of other pos itions, to recognise that tourism is something that we can do, that we can deliver. And so as I take my seat, Mr. Speaker, I will end on this note: Tourism and Bermuda have been inextricably linked for over 100 years. As we go forth for the next 100 years, Mr. Speaker, let us put forward our best foot. You cannot have someone wearing Bermuda shorts speak about Horseshoe Beach or some other iconic venue in this Island and not be able to say it convincingly and persuasively. My view, Mr. Speaker, is that that can best be done by someone who is a son or daughter of the soil. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. The Chair now will recognise the Honourable Member from Pembroke East, con-stituency 15, Shadow Minister of Home Affairs, MP Walter Roban. You have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Mr. Speaker. I am happy to rise to speak to this Bill, the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013. I thought my honourable colleague who just took his seat made some very valuable points about some of the issues that we feel concerned about. And despite the fact that …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am happy to rise to speak to this Bill, the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013. I thought my honourable colleague who just took his seat made some very valuable points about some of the issues that we feel concerned about. And despite the fact that this is just about the Bill that the Minister has t abled upon which we are debating, this is really a di scussion about tourism. And frankly, Mr. Speaker, this is the first opportunity we have had to have a substan-tive discussion about tourism over this year. This is the real first, I would suggest, substantive piece of legislation that the Government has brought (obviously linked to their campaign promise). But it really is because we have not really had any big discussions about tourism at all. And I would argue perhaps [it is] because they have been focused on putting this together. And that is fine. One would have thought that since they had so much to say prior to becoming Government we would have talked more about tourism other than, perhaps, the budget and a few occasional reports on trips and some other things . . . a few concessions here and there, some of which were already in line prior to them becoming Gover nment. But this is really the first time that we have had an opportunity to talk really substantively about what is going to be happening with tourism, the actual direction of tourism and where this country is going to go. And I know for you, Mr. Speaker, it is something close to your heart, perhaps because it has been so much a part of your livelihood. So you can under-stand. And your involvement at the Board level as well with trying to shape in more recent years how we move forward. So you have some understanding of these issues. But this is really the first time. So this is a debate not just about the Authority . . . Board Act 2013, this is really about the destiny of Bermuda tourism. So it is more than that. And I am not trying to suggest I am going to stretch latitude here, Mr. Speaker, but I do think that this is what this is about. And it deserves a level of treatment that we would give to any other area that is going to be shaping the destiny of our country going forward. We have heard a lot from the OBA Gover nment about financing and debt —all these other things of which they feel that they are so well versed to deal with . . . and where the country is going in that area. They have set up a commission to deal with other things in Government and all these sorts of things. But this is really one of the core issues that is going to shape our country going forward because as my ho nourable colleague said to me . . . I mean, said to this House, we have been involved with tourism longer than any other economic activity that perhaps currently exists, in the vastness, in that it affects the people of Bermuda. Although international business is there, its presence has not been as long as the visitor indus-try has been here in Bermuda. And the visitor industry certainly has evolved since 1883 and become som ething else, but it still remains an essential economic lifeblood to our country . Thousands of Bermudians still remain employed directly in the industry, let us not even talking about indirectly of the 36- or-so-odd people employed in this country —a considerable amount of Bermudians still remain currently involved with the industry. It built houses, it financed children’s education, it took care of the needs of people, it helped shape families —that is what tourism has been about. So we must give this Act the treatment that is required. It developed musicians of world renown— House of Assembly
from Bermuda through tourism. Arguably, we may be more famous in some of those areas as Bermudians than we are in other areas that we currently exist and have activity in. Some of the musicians were created out of the tourism industry —that is why what my honourable colleague said is so important about the Ber-mudian component of this because it actually has produced world- class talent, the industry here. Some people were so talented they could not even stay in Bermuda, but they started here. They are running hotels (some of them) in other parts of the world. They were world renowned musicians like the Talbot Brothers and others . . . Lance Hayward. Our tourism industry here, our indig-enous industry, created this quality. So when people talk about it is important that Bermudian leadership be strongly considered as we continue to shape this i ndustry —whether it is through the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act or whatever piece of legislation—that has got to be remembered. And that is what my honourable colleague said is so imp ortant to understand, because that has been the history. We have shaped world tourism. That is why the African Diaspora Heritage Trail is i mportant —it started here. It has been given international recognition. These are products of the Bermuda tourism experience and the ideas that have come out of our experience with it. Now fine, we have had some decades of decline and struggle. There is no one who does not understand that. We have been challenged to continue to see tourism efficiently provide a livelihood for the country. But that does not mean that we cannot adapt, we cannot change, we cannot grow. And perhaps it is the idea of the OBA that this is a part of that process. So we shall see, Mr. Speaker, on how what the OBA is bringing to the table to contribute to the continued Bermudian presence in tourism will actually do that. There clearly are some who are sceptical that what they are doing here today —certainly, we on this side have expressed that scepticism —about what they are actually doing today will actually contribute to that . . . some of the substantive issues that face Bermuda tourists. My honourable colleague, Mr. Furbert, put forth our case as well about how we see this Act comparable to the Tourism Board Act 2012. And hopefully those words will be taken with some ser iousness by the OBA Government and its friends and family and those who are supporting its policies. But I ask a question as well, Mr. Speaker. What will this Tourism Authority that will come out of the Tourism Act really do to address those issues? And I say it like this, I listened to the Minister and to his presentation, but there are some things that I did not hear and that I think are important. I did not hear from the Minister some of the rationales that make this particular structure so much better in doing for tourism than either the Board that precedes it or even what the more governmental structure has done. I say that in a couple of ways. One, clearly, this Tourism Authority Act appears to . . . gives them a power to raise certain . . . to apply some levies or fees which will be taken out of the activity industry which will fund this Authority. The Minister has not even told us how much they expect to raise through that over time—none. Now, that might be interesting to see because comparatively we know how much the Gov-ernment spends on tourism now. Is that a figure that is quantifiable right now . . . that the Minister and his team can project how much they expect to raise over time through that figure? I have not heard anything. We have heard a lot of words, but none of the actual things that might actually make the Minister’s argument credible. That actually, it is value for money going this way. Tourism is a costly exercise for the Bermuda Government, and this Authority will actually bring some financial benefits to how we run tourism —I have not heard that from the Minister. That some of the lev-ies and fees and the projection on perhaps at what point will they feel that the Authority will become self - sufficient, because there seems to be a goal that this independent Authority will over time become self - sufficient. Where are the projections in that, compared to what has been spent or what is being spent now or what has been spent over time? I have not seen any of that information. Now my honourable colleagues have mentioned about how, historically, there has been this r elationship, particularly with the hoteliers as it relates to the marketing of their product and how much we spend on marketing their properties over marketi ng Bermuda, and how the Bermuda Government has carried quite a bit of the burden of that. And what you find in other jurisdictions is that the actual properties put a lot of money into marketing their product intern ationally. And the Government focuses on promoting the country while the properties, the respective pro perties, put money and investment into their [own] properties. Now we know that in Bermuda that has been a very strange thing. That has not actually happened as efficiently as it could have. And I know that a former Tourism Minister worked quite hard to get the hotels to begin to do more of that. I even think there was (and I can be corrected) the effort to develop a fund—a joint fund—that the tourism industry here and the Government would contribute to [so as] to create a sort of pool of financing that would assist with market-ing and other activities that they could jointly partic ipate in. I do not know what happened with that. But it seems to me that the tourism industry, the private industry, has basically treated the Government like its own welfare provider. Right? We talk about the difference between private and public here. And much of the language I have heard from the OBA has been that the public side has been the worst part of the package. But for decades House of Assembly 2174 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
we have been subsidising the private sector. Right? As a part of the background, some of my Members have mentioned the Hotel Concessions Act [and] ot her things. We have done [that with] all of the givea-ways that we have provided to the hot el industry in recent years through . . . for Payroll Tax, even efforts for those who want to refurbish and redevelop their properties. We have given so much back to them. That is money that they should have been paying into the Government coffers as a product of their activity. So to some degree we found that the private operators in the tourism industry have used Gover nment as a crutch! Right? And then who has been the sacrifice? Clearly, clearly, the decline of Bermudians working in the industry has not improved. Clearly, the physical state of some of the product has not i mproved. Clearly, the offerings on- Island have not i mproved. And those were never the responsibility of the Government, Mr. Speaker. They were always, and have been since 1883 (since that date came up earl ier). Bermuda tourism has been primarily a private e nterprise, not publicly run or set up like you find in some other jurisdictions, that actually set up the tour-ism industry and then maybe they privatise it later. Or in some cases, in places like Mexico and others, [they are] huge public interests. I mean, the only substantive properties that we owned in tourism that were Government related were Stonington and, of course, the old Club Med property which was owned by the Government but then leased to a private oper ator. But that would have been this huge Government ownership in tourism. So much of the activity, much of the investment, has been that of the private sector. But they have been using the Bermuda Government for decades as a social crutch and then blaming workers or the Government or whoever else for what was wrong —whoever —those who represent workers. So I say all that to find out from the Minister (because this is not what the Minister talked about) how the Authority is going to change this dynamic of making tourism more efficient in itself to pursue the investment it requires. Yes, some might argue, well, like we debated an Act last week (I am sorry, last sitting) about the Park Hyatt. You know, an effort by the Government to bring overseas investment into the product. The Bermuda Government has for decades (and I would give those who came before us as well) tried to encourage that relationship, encourage people to come here and invest in the tourism product. But what we found in more cases than not [was that] the hotel association and their members, rather than being the generator of the real ideas to push tourism forward, they have depended on the Government to do it, like they do not have the intellectual capital to facilitate some of the structural issues that my honourable colleague men-tioned. That is where it should be coming from —from the industry. And I do recall that at one point a former Tourism Minister brought, or invited, AAA to come in here and do an examination of our properties. And what was discovered is that those that were offering the premium rates of $500 or $600 a night in rooms (which one would argue would be sort of four - or five - star properties) were barely three- star properties — they were barely three. And we know we only really have had one five- star property in Bermuda and that is the Rosewood Tucker’s Point. Again, it is sustain ability facilitated by Government activity —a Gover nment Act. Seemingly all the private wise heads down at Tucker’s Point and the Bermuda Properties Ltd. did not have the means or the ability to survive on their own. So who did they come to [to] save themselves? They came to a Bermuda Government. Again, we have the Bermuda Government facilitating the wher ewithal of private industry. Now, I am not suggesting that that was wrong, because these things are done often in the national interest. Tourism is a national industry. It was like . . . I do not know, it was like the US outsourcing the run-ning of the defence industry to somebody else. It just would not . . . you know, it just would not happen. So we see tourism —at least this side does —as a national industry. And so Government involvement is essential at some level to ensure the national interest and so [over] periods of time that has happened. That is why I believe we argue the points that we do, Mr. Speaker, about this Tourism Authority and the distance, or the perceived distance that the Government is arguing it has from being a Government body to a so- called independent body. We are not certain that that is the best thing for a national indus-try. And I am not trying to speak social stuff, socialism stuff here. I am not trying to speak that because I have already acknowledged that our tourism industry has for most of its history been pretty much a private operation, and that has been a part of its success frankly. I am not arguing for anything else. But I do also argue that a certain level of Government i nvolvement is essential to its success because it is in the national interest. It employs a core part and has historically employed a core part of our citizenry. But, as I say again, I have not heard much of what I would call data from the Minister supporting how this move to an Authority is going to benefit the running of tourism from a cost standpoint, as to the reasons why it is more cost -effective to set up an Authority. Because the Government will be spending less on it, that, act ually, we can employ, whether it be Bermudians or whoever we need to run it, perhaps, at better terms, that we will get better performance from our staff this way, that the changes that we are making will bring about some efficiencies that will allow us to be more effective in how we shape tourism. Also, Mr. Speaker, and perhaps the Minister will give those answers later, I do not know, but it was House of Assembly
not a part of the brief that he gave to this House earl ier. So I am not seeing some of the things that would make me understand why the Government is going this way. Some of the other things that I am interested in understanding, Mr. Speaker, because, again, this is really the first substantive debate that we have had on tourism all year —this time right now —we really have not had it. And, frankly, that is an indictment on the Government because it should have been up in front a little bit sooner than now —any discussion on tourism considering its importance to the country. What I am interested in knowing, Mr. Speaker, is how this Authority is going to help the Government to reach the objectives in the Tourism Plan. T hat was not mentioned in the Minister’s brief. Although we know that the Authority acknowledges the Plan, ac-cepts it as being . . . And the Minister acknowledged that it is the framework upon which they are pursuing the objectives for tourism. But the Minister did not specifically say how the Authority is going to help to reach those goals. There are goals already set in the Tourism Plan to be reached from when it was set up. We are almost a year in. We have had no report about how those goals are being met. There are set expenditures year on year. The Plan has a particular timeline at-tached to it, and it attaches expenditure to very core areas around the development and redevelopment of the Bermuda tourism product. And there is one thing in this House that is clear, Mr. Speaker. We all accept the Tourism Plan. That is one thing that the Minister does not have to be concerned about and he does not have to scratch his head and worry about his hair fal ling out or worrying about anything else falling out about —
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Walter H. RobanWell, yes, perhaps. All right? Perhaps he has already got rid of it so he does not have to worry about it. But, Mr. Speaker, that is one thing he does not have to worry about. This House endorses the Touris m Plan. And so we look forward to the …
Well, yes, perhaps. All right? Perhaps he has already got rid of it so he does not have to worry about it. But, Mr. Speaker, that is one thing he does not have to worry about. This House endorses the Touris m Plan. And so we look forward to the Plan fulfilling itself, Mr. Speaker. But we have not heard much from the Minister about the Plan. He has not . . . the Honourable Minister, linked and rationalised the Plan to these amendments in showing us how it is going to further advance the Plan, if the Plan is a benchmark document upon which we are pursuing our destiny in tourism. I have not heard things about how . . . other than the Plan, I have not even heard how this Author ity is going to advance Bermudian involvement in tour-ism. The only thing we have heard about Bermudian involvement with this Authority is how many Bermudi-ans are being made redundant as a result of the A uthority. That is about it. And I do think, Mr. Speaker, that part of the Minister getting an endorsement for this would be to show Bermudi-ans how they are a part of the Authority, how they are going to . . . how the Authority is going to make them more embracing of seeing tourism success. The Mi nister did not make that case today. And I wonder when he is going to make the case because, as I said, this is the first real discussion we have had about tourism all year. I am going to say that a few times because this is what I see. And so there is a lot more work to be done if the Minister and his team are going to e ndeavour to do it, on making a convincing case for this Authority. So I wait to hear a few of those things. I wait to see some metrics or data on how this Authority is more cost -effective than any structure that it has been preceded by. The Minister has not made that case. I would be interested to see what sort of revenue is go-ing to be raised by the Authority through the new mechanism that it has been afforded. I have not heard that from the Minister. I also would like to know (and I know that the Government has done some work in this area) how the Authority is going to facilitate more inward inves tment in our product. I have not heard much about that. Because those are some of the key structural issues —inward investment, Bermudian participation, better product. Some of those things I have not heard about . . . at least the Minister’s brief today did not make cases for them or they were just missed alt ogether. So, Mr. Speaker, I remain unconvinced by this Tourism Authority Act. And my honourable colleague has already gone through some of the comparative issues, which I think have been made very clear as to whether it is really even different from the Board. My honourable colleague has done that. I remain concerned as he is about this issue of the Board being able to invest and to handle and to invest in interests and to acquire interests and so on. Now, one might argue that is just a different complexion of what the Board or what the Tourism Ministry or Board does now in that it can provide funding for tourism -related initiatives now, but of course that gets approved by the Minister, Cabinet, and ultimately the Legislature. But that component is being removed now with the so-called independence that the Board is being afforded . . . or the A uthority and the Board are being afforded. So that is a concern because . . . It is! I mean, if tourism expenditure, arguably, or even if based on the National Tourism Plan, if that expenditure is going to change year on year, how much of that money that is allocated in the Tourism Plan is expected to go to the new Authority? The Minister could have talked about that because that is already there, he does not have to make up those figures. All those projections of Government expend iture going forward are laid out in the National Tourism Plan. So the fact that the Minister did not come here House of Assembly 2176 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
and give us some more exact, precise information on that, I do not understand why not, because it is all there, if the Plan is the framework, the foundation of where we are going.
[Laughter and crosstalk] [Gavel]
Mr. Walter H. RobanSorry, Mr. Speaker. So, Mr. Speaker, I do think the Minister’s defence, support, information, on the rationale for this Act has been short and has not really proven the case on why the Authority will do what the Honourable Members of the Government said it will do, or they told …
Sorry, Mr. Speaker. So, Mr. Speaker, I do think the Minister’s defence, support, information, on the rationale for this Act has been short and has not really proven the case on why the Authority will do what the Honourable Members of the Government said it will do, or they told the country it will do. There are just some key components that I believe are missing. I believe that is the foundation of our own argument on this side. I am sure there are other Members who will speak to that. And I do hope that perhaps during this debate the Honourable and Learned Member who speaks for Tourism will provide us more clarity, Mr. Speaker, on these issues because, as I have said from the begi nning, tourism is essential and has been an essential part of our history. My honourable colleague mentioned 1883, so that is the depth of it. It has built houses. It has educated children. It has created suc-cess in many people’s lives. And I am talking about Berm udians here and also non- Bermudians because there are many persons around the world who have been a product of our tourism experience from every . . . from all over the world —Italian, French, South A frica . . . you know, all over the world! And there are many people who work in tourism who have gained friends globally. Some of those people have left Ber-muda and have set up great hospitality operations in other like parts of the world because of the experience that they had in Bermuda. So Bermuda’s tourism product has had global impact. It has been a fram ework for other jurisdictions setting up their own tour-ism products.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you. So in my conclusion I say this: I do hope the Government makes a better case. The concerns that my honourable colleagues have raised around this Act are completely valid, and perhaps the Government can show us a more clear vision as to how this A uthority is …
Thank you. So in my conclusion I say this: I do hope the Government makes a better case. The concerns that my honourable colleagues have raised around this Act are completely valid, and perhaps the Government can show us a more clear vision as to how this A uthority is going to advance the very Plan that we all have endorsed and ensure that through at least the time period of the National Tourism Plan we are going to have the success that we all desire for Bermuda tourism. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member. Now the Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from Hamilton East, MP D. V. Burgess, who is the Deputy Opposition Leader. MP Burgess, you have the floor. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think we . . …
All right. Thank you, Honourable Member. Now the Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from Hamilton East, MP D. V. Burgess, who is the Deputy Opposition Leader. MP Burgess, you have the floor. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think we . . . the question is, Why is our industry in the state it is in today? Mr. Speaker, when we go back to our heyday back in the ’70s and the ’80s —and I know the former Tourism Minister, David Dodwell, will agree, that the competition then was not as great —Bermuda was one of the very few places you could come for a v acation. Today the competition has increased by maybe a couple of thousand per cent. That is how great the competition is. You know, in our heyday we . . . it was diffe rent than it is today. We serviced our guests, our tourists, with entertainment, golf. Mr. Speaker, today even though we brag about having seven or eight golf courses, to get a starting time, a playing time, it is not that easy because most of the golf courses in Berm uda are membership [courses], even the public Port Royal. And on Saturdays a nd Sundays it is difficult to get a starting time for anybody . . . for a tourist. Say you are going to go on the Internet, Well, let me try to book a vacation with a week or two notice. A golf vacation in Bermuda. They will face an almost impossible task to get a golf time for weekends. And as you know, you and I know very well, that the occupancy of the hotels is increased over the weekends as compared to Monday and Tuesday, so people will be more apt to come and want to play golf . . . or the entertainm ent. We do not have the entertainment that we used to have. As my honourable colleague alluded to, we had the Talbot Brothers, Hubert Smith and the [Esso] Steel Band and all that there. You would see every week in the newspaper. I think it was on a Tuesday that you would see the full schedule of where these groups were going to be. Where are the Talbot Brothers playing? You even had the water ski show at Castle Harbour that they put on for our tourists. We do not have that today. And I do not think that we would get back to the level that we were in our heyday. And I do not know if that was the reason why the former Government —the UBP Government —lost concentration, lost their way when it came to tourism as far as putting the investment and putting the inter-est in tourism and instead put the concentration on international business. That was not bad, now, be-cause international business is really holding us t ogether now. But, you know, they really concentrated on one pillar of the economy in Bermuda. That is, yo u really cannot run off of one pillar of the economy. You can get in trouble like we are in today. So, I mean, former Ministers have tried hard. One Minister had a theme, “Let yourself go. ” And I House of Assembly
would have hoped that would have been successful. We had “Pop and Swizzle” (or Sizzle, whatever). Ev ery Minister, they have tried. And even with us, we i ntroduced the Hotel Concessions Act to try to get h otels to bring the standards up because with new pro ducts coming on the market worldwide you were getting some f irst-class facilities that we were competing with. And our hotels . . . I do not even think at that time we had up to three star. But if you are the only show in town, or worldwide, you can get away with that. But once the competition comes in place as it did then we lost out big time. And consequently what did we lose? We lost, before 1998 (and I am not using 1998 as any factor, because whether it was 1998 or 2008) we lost about 50 per cent of our bed count. So we certainly will not get that revenue back. I read, I think, somewhere this week, visitors spent $37 million less up to this point in Bermuda than they did last year. So those are not good signs. I mean, we had problems way back in the ’80s because when Holiday Inn closed, then Loews took over, and when Loews closed, Government was trying very hard to get somebody, an operator, to operate that hotel . . . to run that hotel. And it was the Honourable Mini ster, Irving Pearman, who was able to secure Club Med. And that was not fully accepted by the Government then because some in the Government figured out Club Med was a standard down. But as Irving would probably have told them, it was better than nothing. And they came here, they were not that successful, and they were here for maybe three or four years and then they left. And there has not been an ybody there since. So both Governments have tried to get the product where it should be. And with the Hotel Con-cessions Act, you know this as well as I do, you had the improvements in the plan —the Princess has i mproved, the Reefs has improved. The Reefs has i mproved so much that they have got so many intern ational awards, and I applaud that and I like that. And Tucker’s Point . . . you know, so there are some things that happened, but the competition is still great. It is still great out there, Mr. Speaker. And, Mr. Speaker, what we have done in Bermuda, the workers in the country in the hotel i ndustry, they have had a wage freeze for I think the last at least three years, maybe four. They have played their par t to try to keep the product affordable to all in order to increase the numbers. They have played their part. And their wages right now are at the 2010 rate or the 2009 rate, if it was four years. And they are cop-ing. I would not say they are coping very w ell, but they are coping. You know, I think all parties have done what they can to try to get this thing right. And I do not think this Authority is going to be the answer to ever ything but I am hoping it works. Let nobody fool you, I am hoping it works because it is not about who is in power, it is about Bermuda. So I am hoping it works. Mr. Speaker, let me finish off with the one that you probably know is dear to my heart. [It] is the r edundancy of the workers, the redundancy of those positions at the Department of Tourism. You have un-settled some people’s lives because I think it is at the end of this month it finishes, the Department closes, or whatever date it is.
[Inaudible interjection] Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: It’s not? Okay, whene ver it is . . . it is shortly, let us put it that way. It is shortly that they will be unsettled and some do not know where they are going to be working right now. And then we have the Minister and he has said it today and said it before, that those that can . . . the workers can reapply. Well, this morning he did something which I applaud. He praised those workers up. They are good workers! If they are that good, why do they have to reapply? That puzzles me. It puzzles me, Mr. Speak-er. And to lose their job and not only lose their job, Mr. Speaker, today they would experience 5 per cent less take- home pay not knowing where they are working whenever this happens, shortly. They are taking home less pay but their expenses still increase on a day -today basis, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the other concern I have is this Bill does not state, nobody has stated, how many em-ployees will be employed. We lost 40- odd jobs in there. Are you going to have 20 people in there? Are you going to have 12? We do not know that. And as my ho nourable colleague, Mr. Roban, said, we do not see any projections there on what it will cost this A uthority to run. What is the projected revenue for this time period? And I am sure you can give us those figures be-cause you . . . with the new Tourism Aut hority fee, you should be able to give us a projected figure on that. And the other question is, Is the whole Tourism budg-et or most of it going to go to this Authority plus the fee—the Tourism Authority fee? I am puzzled there and I am not very comfortable supporting this Bill b ecause some things we do not know. And we are tal king about the taxpayers’ money. For us to make a decision to pass this Bill, we should know what some projected costs are, we should know how many employees are going to work there, we should know what the projected revenues are— we do not know that. And so it is going to be very, very difficult because what they have done is they have privatised tourism to a private entity. The question is who is next? Is the Post Office next? Are sections in the Public Works next? Who will be privatised next? And to say you are going to put people, those that are not . . . These guys are laughing. This is not a joke. The other side is laughing. This is not a joke. We are talking about people’s livel ihoods. That is what we are talking about. It is no joke House of Assembly 2178 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
to me. It is serious when somebody loses a job. We are talking about we are going to put these people in other departments, Mr. Speaker, when we are forcing people to take early retirement so that these people can go there. Is that the formula there? Mr. Speaker, every 100 people that you send home on early retirement, if you let them work another year, if you let them work, each year it would save the fund $3 million. And I am basing that on a $30,000 retirement package that they will get annually. B ecause it is about 470 people in that range, between 60 and 64, who are eligible that they are asking to take early retirement. And that fund is suffering, yet they are trying to make people go home. You can save that. Let these people work to 70 and see what money you would save. For every 100 (I am doing it on an average), you could save $3 million a year. So if it was 400, that is $12 million a year. And over a five-year period that is $60 million a year. That fund can use that. Mr. Speaker, we have concerns on this side of the House on going forward. We want any plan that comes in place to work, but at the same time we are dealing with individuals, we are dealing with people that have families. They do not know if they are going to be working in Public Works on something they have never done before—from Tourism to Public Works — they do not know. So they are going into a whole dif-ferent environment, work environment. This is not good. It is not good, Mr. Speaker. So Mr. Speaker, again, it is a lot of . . . there are some unanswered questions there that we need to know before we can comfortably support this. As much as we would like to support this, because we want tourism to succeed; regardless of whom the Mi nister is, we want it to succeed. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Minister, the Minister from Paget East, constituency 22, the Minister of Economic Development, Dr. Grant Gibbons. You have the floor. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of perspectives …
Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Minister, the Minister from Paget East, constituency 22, the Minister of Economic Development, Dr. Grant Gibbons. You have the floor. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of perspectives on the Tourism Authority Act which we have got before us today. And so far I think it has been, I think, a reasonable debate because there has been general sense. There is the ability to be able to point fingers and cast blame here (we have had a little bit of that but not too much), but I think it would be fair to say that certainly what I have been hearing on that side i s that there is basically a sense that we really have some deep and complex issues in tourism going for-ward, and we have not really found the right formula yet. A number of people have talked about product. A number of people have talked about issues abou t getting Bermudians involved. And people have looked at it from a number of different directions. In fact, the speaker who just sat down said (paraphras-ing) all parties (and I think he was referring to political parties there) have done what they can to get things right, but obviously we still have not got it right. And I rather like . . . there is sort of an old expression (Mr. Speaker, you have heard it before). It is a definition. And that is the definition of “insanity”, and that is if you keep doing the same things over and over again and expecting a different result, that is insanity. And what the Minister has brought to us today is a different way of doing things. It is a different ap-proach. Now, yes, there are some questions about it. Is it a silve r bullet? Probably not. And there are some risks. There are always risks when you change things. But I think the real risk, Mr. Speaker, is continuing to do the same things over and over again and expecting things to get better. It is true. Political part ies—whether it be the current one who has had a very short tenure, or the previous Progressive Labour Party, or indeed the United Bermuda Party before that —have tried different things. But the model has been pretty much the same. And that is direction from the top, Ministerial control, the Minister being the master strategist. And I think one of the challenges that we have seen is that . . . and I am going to say this nicely, when you have people in the Ministerial position (with very few excep-tions) who ha ve been amateurs —we have had doctors, we have had accountants, we have a lawyer right now who has been perfectly prepared to admit that his expertise is not tourism —what you end up with is a different plan every couple of years; you zig this way, you zag that way. And the issue that we have had is a lack of continuity and a lack of consistent direction.
[Crosstalk] Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: And that is exactly what my honourable colleague, Shawn Crockwell, said when he brought this legislation today. We need consistent leadership. We need consistent direction. And we need a better governance structure. And that is exactly what the Tourism Authority is designed to do. Is it high risk? Certainly not. There have been a number of other very successful jurisdictions that have used a Tourism Authority model to do a good job. And one of the reasons that it is a departure and it is an important change is [because] we need to get away from the politics of it. We need to try and take . . . we are never going to be able take all the politics out of this, but we need to take most of the politics out because politics in some respects has been one of the difficulties that tourism has had in House of Assembly
terms of specific and consistent direction over the years. Because every Minister coming in as the master strategist has got his own perspective—rightly or wrongly —about what needs to be done. Whether it was “Sizzle and Pop”, whether it was the Tourism Board, whatever it may be, it has always been an ap-proach which is top down. And, yes, there are people who have worked on Tourism Committees and Tourism Boards and all the rest of it that have a fair amount of expertise, peo-ple from the industry. But when you have political d irection from the top, you are always going to be su bject to the tumult, the exigencies, the expediencies of politics. And I think what we are trying to do is that we are trying to get away from that to provide some inde-pendence, not total independence, but some more autonomy to a group that will bring consistent and pr ofessional management to it. I think, whether you want to look at a corporate model or whatever else, I think most of us would be prepared to agree that companies —certainly out there and, indeed, governments —rise and fall on the quality of leadership and the quality of how they man-age things. And what we are suggesting today, what the Minister is suggesting is a different approach. I have to applaud this Minister because it takes some courage to change what is a model that we have seen over many, many, many years. It takes courage b ecause there is always a risk in this. I do not think it is a large risk. And I think, as I said, the major risk is continuing to do the same things over and over again. I have to say that to some degree this is kind of co ming around again. I was sitting here listening to the other speakers and thinking that I remember wor king with the former Honourable Member, David Dodwell, in the mid to late ’90s. At the time he was Minister of Tourism. And here was a Minister of Tourism who probably above all Ministers of Tourism had the ability to be able to look at this from a professional experience sense. He was one of the few that actually came to this business from tourism, from hospitality. And his reaction after having been in that position for a couple of years was, We need to change the way we govern and manage this business. He was the one who probably could have said, I know what I am doing. He does know what he is doing. But he could have said at that point, I know what I am doing as Minister because I understand this business. I am in this business, I have a hotel that has made money in this business and has been very successful. But what that former Honourable Member said was, We need to change the way we are doing this. I can remember working with him at the time because part of my responsibility was Management Services. So Management Services and the Depar tment of Tourism at the time were working to try to put in place a Tourism Authority model because that Ho n-ourable Member (at the time) who had that experience said, This is the way we have got to go forward. I think if there is anything in terms of hindsight being 20/20, it is unfortunate Mr. Speaker, because had that model been followed by the incoming Gov-ernment at the time we may not have had the extraor-dinary and precipitous decline in tourism from the late ’90s until now. The air arrivals, as you know, Mr. Speaker, went from 390,000 [to] 400,000. We are now looking at maybe in the best year so far at something on the order of 240,000 to 250,000 air arrivals. So we have had a precipitous decline. Was there decline before that? Yes, there was and I think we have all admitted today that frankly from about the ’80s on the model was not working as well as it could. And ther e are probably a multitude of reasons for that. So there is no simple approach. But what we are suggesting here today is a different way of man-aging and governing this. And Members on the other side have talked about, What is the difference be-tween these two models? And there are, for those that have actually read the legislation, there are significant differences in terms of what I will call independence and ability to be able to be consistent and to move forward in a consistent way. But one of the issues, and again it gets back to this top -down model of management, is that the Tourism Board—the members on that Board — whether they are the 15 independent members or the 20 if you add in the ex officio, basically . . . certainly, independent, relied for their appointment on the Mini ster, on the Ministerial appointment going forward and there was a certain amount of discretion —
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Point of order. The Member is misleading this House.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWhat is your point of order, Honourable Member ? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: There were eight. There were certain members that were picked by the hotel group itself. They were not picked by the Minister.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Yes, thank you. So Hotel A ssociation . . . yes. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: I think the Hotel A ssociation recommended . . . five, was it? Okay, five. Fair enough. I think the point I am making here, Mr. Speaker, is that under the …
All right. Yes, thank you. So Hotel A ssociation . . . yes.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: I think the Hotel A ssociation recommended . . . five, was it? Okay, five. Fair enough. I think the point I am making here, Mr. Speaker, is that under the Tourism Authority model, once a member of the Tourism Authority Board has been appointed, they simple cannot be removed because the Minister does not like what they said a week or so ago. I think of the Brannon model here if I can put it in House of Assembly 2180 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
that context. The only way to remove a member from this Board going forward, once they have been appointed, is for cause. But before, what you saw was people coming in and off the Board. So what that meant was you still had very much . . . even though you had a Board, even though you had a Committee, you still had very much what I will call top down. Another problem with the Board —the current model we have, not the Tourism Authority —basically was pointed out by my honourable colleague, Shawn Crockwell. And that was there were . . . maybe the nice way to put it is that there were some conf used lines of authority. You had the Board, but you still had the department, and, from what I can tell . . . and maybe you can say, Look, I am a spectator in this . But I have certainly heard it from the Minister as well (who is there now) it was not entirely clear what the author ity of the Board was versus the authority of the [A uthority]. And one of the differences between the Board and this new Authority, as the Minister said earlier on today, is that the Authority will be able to speak as a singular entity with a single voice. So there will be f ocus and concentration and you will not have mixed lines of authority. I think, Mr. Speaker, there are a number of other issues as well. And there have been issues raised about the question of too much authorit y, too little authority —I think what it comes down to when you are setting up a corporate structure (which is rea lly what this is, the Tourism Authority has a corporate structure to it) —they have certain powers and objects. Any company has that. If you look in the Companies Act, you will see how that works there. We have gone from the old “objects” which are now “objectives” and “powers” to “powers of an actual person.” But I think in this you need to set those out and you need to be able to define some of those powers and you need to be able to give them an extent of their authority. Is there a risk that you might have a rogue Board? Maybe. I doubt it very much. I do not think the Minister or the Chairman is going to be appointing a rogue Board that is going to go off and make stupid investments. I do not think they are going to do that at all. In the event that something like that happens, there are checks and balances here. There is going to be significant monies (at least for the time being) al though the Minister has said quite clearly he would like for this Authority to be financially independent. Cer-tainly, in terms of allocation of monies from this Legi slature, if it looks like it is going in a bad direction (and I doubt it will) then there are some checks and balanc-es there. The Minister can remove members of the A uthority for cause. So I think if there are significant i ssues there, I am sure that they will be addressed. But I think that is the whole point. And that is setting up a good Board, a solid Board which has the focus, the expertise, and the determination to take a consistent approach to it. Mr. Speaker, we have also heard some co mments from Members on the other side that we need more of a Bermudian component to this Board. It may have been in the context of the CEO. And I do not remember the Minister ever, Mr. Speaker, saying we are not going to hire a Bermudian. What he said was, we are going to go out and look for the best person possible. Now maybe Members on that side feel that that excludes Bermudians. I do not, Mr. Speaker. And I am sure the Minister does not either. But in terms of a Bermudian component, I cannot think of a more Bermudian component than the Chairman designate who has been appointed — Mr. Dodwell. And I do not want blow too much smoke because certainly I will have to live with his ego in the next day or so, but certainly in terms of expertise, Bermudian component, and understanding the nature of Bermuda tourism and hospitality —I cannot think of a better Bermudian to be Chai rman, which is the highest position on this Authority, Mr. Speaker. I used to get tired of having to stand up in the House and congratulate that Honourable Member on an award in Condé Nast, Travel & Leisure . . . whatever it is. The former Member was winning awards left, right and centre. Every year there were two or three awards —whether it was the Reefs, whether it was the Nisbet Plantation —the Honourable Member certainly knows what he is doing. But I think the whole idea here is that . . . between that H onourable Member and the Minister they will put together a Board that has the expertise and the ability to be able to do it. So that was certainly one of the issues that I had some difficulty with in terms of Bermudian component. I think there are a couple of other points that I would like to make here. Let us see . . . we talked about the CEO as Bermudian. There has been, I guess, a little bit of word play, maybe that is the way to put it, Mr. Speaker, in terms of this issue of redun-dancy. And I think just to make it crystal clear, and I think the Minister was crystal clear when he stood up. Yes, when you dissolve a department there are r edundancies. But that is not the same thing as a job loss. And what the Honourable Member was saying was that the current members of the department who will apply to be on the Tourism Authority, if they are not chosen, the guarantee is there that we will find them a job in Government somewhere else. So there will not be job loss. But technically, yes, if you want to play wit h words, there will be some redundancies there. So I think the issues on that, I hope, are pretty clear. I think that the Minister has been bending over backwards to try and give assurances . . . and I understand. We all understand the anxiety that members of the department may have as to where they are g oing to be in a little bit. That is difficult. That is difficult to completely satisfy them on because we will have to see how this moves as we go forward. But if you are going to do something different and if you are going to House of Assembly
change a model, then there are going to be changes. And that is kind of the nature of life in a way, and no one wants to be unsympathetic, but in order to do what is right and good for tourism governance, and development of the tourism product in terms of the economy, we have got to make these changes. And that is the way that we need to go forward. There was a certain amount of, I guess, complaining on that side that we have perhaps, (maybe the word was) we have subsidised tourism for a long time. That is true, Mr. Speaker, we have subsidised tourism for a long time. But there was also an implic ation that somehow Government has been the one that has been spending all the marketing money. That is not true, Mr. Speaker. I think if you look at the Fai rmont and some of the other hotels in terms of the amount of marketing they do, they do spend substan-tial sums. And it is obviously going to be up to the A uthority as to how they increase the amount of money that they are able to get from the private sector in ad-dition to the Tourism Fee of 2.5 per cent of the rack rate (which they will be getting automatically as a con-sequence of this) and possibly for a couple of years a Government allocation as well. But it is going to be up to the Tourism Authority by both persuasion and lea dership to show them why it is going to be a good thing to basically invest in this as well. Because, quite frank-ly, if people can work together on this —and that is part of the model here, it is public/private sector wor king together —I think that is going to be a very important part of this whole piece. So I think there were some other questions asked about who is going to be privatised next. Mr. Speaker, that is a little bit of setting up a straw man. This concept of a Tourism Authority has been around for a long, long time. I do not feel that way, but I am starting to feel like I have been in Government for a long time, and I guess I have at this point. So we are going back 20 years, this is a 20- year-old concept that we are talking about here —so this is not an idea that popped into somebody’s head a year or so ago. And yes, it was in the OBA platform and yes, the Minister is bringing it in very quickly because he and the Gov-ernment see this as a very important part of how we are going to get tourism to function more effectively going forward. So I think, Mr. Speaker, those are most of the points that I wanted to comment on. But I would urge Honourable Members and indeed the public, if they get a chance, to have a look at this particular piece of legislation. I think it is an historic piece of legislation. It is a new direction going forward. Is it the silver bullet? No. But is it going to give us a much better chance of managing our tourism product, developing tourism, doing a better job with marketing, having more focus and emphasis in a very competitive complex world with a lot more competition out there? My bet, Mr. Speaker, is yes it will. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from . . . in red! [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIn all red . . . all red. The Chair recognises the Honourable Member from Sandys [South Central], the Learned Member, MP Kim Wilson. You have the floor.
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonThank you, Mr. Speaker. Follo wing last week’s episode, because I am somewhat vertically challenged, I thought that I would wear red t oday to perhaps draw attention to myself because—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou know how much I like red, do you?
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonYes! It wo rked last week for the Honourable Member from . . . [constituency] 4? From Pembroke. She is wearing blue today so we are col-our-coordinated with the Somerset colours. Mr. Speaker, I intend to be very brief. There are a couple of points that I want to raise …
Yes! It wo rked last week for the Honourable Member from . . . [constituency] 4? From Pembroke. She is wearing blue today so we are col-our-coordinated with the Somerset colours. Mr. Speaker, I intend to be very brief. There are a couple of points that I want to raise with respect to some of the sections that I am not exactly clear on. However, before I address that I wanted to just speak quickly about the 47 staff members. I am pleased because this is the first time that I have actually heard the Government, and par ticularly the Learned and Honourable Minister of Tourism and Transport, refer to it in the legal sense. It is a redun-dancy. And I know that one of the Members on the other side—the Government side —indicated that we were mixing words, but the law is the law . And what is happening to these employees is that their positions are being made redundant, the fact that they have to apply for other positions, et cetera. But squarely on the definition of “redundancy” as is outlined in the Employment Act, I am thrilled to know that they are finally acknowledging that these positions are made redundant. I am wondering whether or not the Government has done any calcul ation as to what the redundancy pay will be for these 47 individuals because I believe under the Act it i s 16 weeks maximum. However, I also note that . . . my other question would be insofar as superannuation. If these individuals are now no longer employed by the Government and they are employed by a private entity, what happens to the money that was accru ed in the superannuation now that they are on a private scheme? I am just wondering if the Honour able and Learned Minister of Transport will answer those questions with respect. And I am not asking for myself, I am asking particularly for those employees — the 47 employees —that are concerned about their fate. House of Assembly 2182 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Mr. Speaker, if I can also turn to the Bill itself now. In particular, let me start with section 4, the composition of the Board of Authority.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou know, Honourable Member, you know we are going to deal with that in —
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonBut with respect to the compos ition of the Board, I note that when we had a 2012 Act that was tabled here and passed concerning the Bermuda Tourism Board, the PLP Government made a specific point of ensuring legislatively that there was a provision contained in the legislation to …
But with respect to the compos ition of the Board, I note that when we had a 2012 Act that was tabled here and passed concerning the Bermuda Tourism Board, the PLP Government made a specific point of ensuring legislatively that there was a provision contained in the legislation to require that certain bodies be represented on the Board. When I look at this particular legislation, it is a little bit concerning —no, it is very concerning to me, that no such requirement exists. I am talking specifically about representation on a Board of Authority from a body of individuals that probably has the most employees represented within that industry and that is particularly the workers and the Bermuda Industrial Union. When the PLP Government tabled a similar piece of legislation, we made a point to ensure in that in the legislation the composition of the Board r equired that the President of the BIU be a part of that particular body. In addition, we had the Chamber of Commerce and some other entities that, again, were equally as important with respect to the tourism indus-try—travel and tourism industry —in Bermuda. But certainly I would urge this Government to consider paying homage to the important role that the Bermuda Industrial Union plays in this community, particularly as it relates to the representation of workers within the travel and tourism industry, and place in their legisl ation a requirement that the Union representatives be part of the Board. I am sure we will hear that, Well, we have got great scope in terms of who can be on the Board, et cetera, et cetera. And that is all well and fine. However, Mr. Speaker, to confirm the commitment that the PLP Government had to ensure that a representative from the BIU was there —we put it in black and white, it was in the legislation. Mr. Speaker, I also note that with respect to other sections of this Act, particularly as it relates to the powers of the Authority, I am somewhat con-cerned because I note that in the 2012 Act the powers of the Authority . . . we have already heard, Mr. Speaker, a lot about the fact that the Department of Tourism under the 2012 Act still was in existence. I guess my questions with respect to this that the Hon-ourable Minister answer for me or at least point out to me (because I do not see where it is in the legislation) what . . . who manages the oversight? Who provides that regulatory oversight? Now that we no longer have a Department of Tourism and we have the legislation that deals with the Hotels (Li-censing and Control) Act 1969, we have got the Reg[ulation]s of 1971, and we have the Act of 1981 — we had a department that helped to facilitate the regu-latory environment of these hotels, the licensing and so forth. If there no longer is a department, who . . . does the Minister stand alone? I do not know if there even is a Minister. I am just saying, How does that happen? Who guards the henhouse, so to speak, is my question in terms of the regulation —
[Inaudible interjection]
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonIt’s not. —in t erms of regulating these entities? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of clarification if the Honourable and Learned Member —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou will have time at the end though. Do you want to do it now? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: There is a lot to do at the end.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Okay. POINT OF CLARIFICATION Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: I just wanted to quickly say that the licensing and regulation of the hotels r emain within the Ministry.
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonWithin the Ministry? I thought there was no Mi nistry. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: I think that is where there has been confusion. We are dissolving the depar tment. The Ministry of Tourism Development and Transport is separate from the Department of [Transport]. The functions —and it is not a …
Within the Ministry? I thought there was no Mi nistry. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: I think that is where there has been confusion. We are dissolving the depar tment. The Ministry of Tourism Development and Transport is separate from the Department of [Transport]. The functions —and it is not a large staff — but the functions of licensing hotels (as it is a regulat ory function) will remain within the Government.
[Inaudible interjections and crosstalk]
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonI do not know, I do not know. So who will be doing the regulatory . . . my question, Mr . Speaker, and no doubt the Honourable and Learned Minister will — House of Assembly
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHe will have a chance again to—
Mrs. Kim N. Wilson—answer in the nearness of time. Thank you, thank you. But, again, my question is, who will do the regulation? Who is the regulator? Now my other question relates specifically to section 13(3) and it is talking about the interest registry. Though I commend that there is this particular provision …
—answer in the nearness of time. Thank you, thank you. But, again, my question is, who will do the regulation? Who is the regulator? Now my other question relates specifically to section 13(3) and it is talking about the interest registry. Though I commend that there is this particular provision that allows for interest of persons, Ministers, or members of the Board who may have an interest in any business conducted by the Authority and that they have to provide written notice to such registry, though I am somewhat surprised . . . though I appreciate a lot of—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, go ahead. Ask the question.
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonThank you, thank you. On this interest registry there is a five dollar fee. So if a member of the public wants to know who is on that registry, who has an interest, they must pay a five dollar fee. Now we know that our . . . the registry …
Thank you, thank you. On this interest registry there is a five dollar fee. So if a member of the public wants to know who is on that registry, who has an interest, they must pay a five dollar fee. Now we know that our . . . the registry that we are all supposed to sign, there is no fee. And I just wondered whether or not —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNow, again, we can deal with that actually when we get in Committee. The specifics of those things can be sorted out.
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonAll right. Thank you for your i ndulgence. My final concern relates specifically to the Tourism Authority fees. Again, generally speaking, this rack rate charge, the 2.5 per cent that the Minister spoke about in his brief is also contained in the legi slation. And, Mr. Speaker, this Tourism Authority …
All right. Thank you for your i ndulgence. My final concern relates specifically to the Tourism Authority fees. Again, generally speaking, this rack rate charge, the 2.5 per cent that the Minister spoke about in his brief is also contained in the legi slation. And, Mr. Speaker, this Tourism Authority fee is . . . and I appreciate that there . . . it is a requirement to be paid based on “X” number of occupants, et cetera, et cetera. I also note in the legislation that it speaks under pursuant to the Miscellaneous Taxes Act 1 976 that every proprietor has to file this along with a statement, et cetera, et cetera. And I guess my question relates to the enforceability of this in that we have, on one hand, this section 15 that talks about this fee that has to be paid. And I know t hat in other pieces of legislation there is a requirement that you pay land tax, for example. And under that legislation — [Inaudible interjection]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, again. Yes, I think . . . I think, yes. We will be able to . . . once we get into Committee, you will be able to drill down— [Inaudible interjection]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Chair now recognises the Honourable Member from Sandys [North]. The Honourable and Learned Member, MP Michael Scott. You have the floor. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Mr. Speaker, thank you. In speaking now to the general principles of the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act, as the Honour able Member from Pembroke …
The Chair now recognises the Honourable Member from Sandys [North]. The Honourable and Learned Member, MP Michael Scott. You have the floor. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Mr. Speaker, thank you. In speaking now to the general principles of the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act, as the Honour able Member from Pembroke [East], Mr. Roban, ind icated, it is an important debate. [This is] the first time that we are addressing the important area in this Par-liament of this economic activity that is so important to us. So it is a v ery important debate. As the Deputy Leader of the PLP indicated, the Honourable Member, Mr. Burgess, of course, we are all interested in seeing the mandate of the new OBA Government —its central mandate—the turning around and growth of this economy and creating jobs for people. And nine months into their tenure there has been precious little attention given to that, or r esults shown. So the debate on the second pillar to our economy has got to be seminal and important. And as I open in my remarks, the thing that I wish to . . . the matter that I wish to first comment upon just even in, Mr. Speaker, the opening Preamble of this Bill, it speaks to the development and then the principles and objectives of the Authority. It speaks to the objec-tives of the Authority being to develop and promote Bermuda as a Tourism Authority. We have had a developed tourism product and industry since Furness Withy. And so I question why we continue to talk about development of it. We have got to get it right. We have got to make sure that the days when we did have 800,000 customers in our country is somewhat approached again. I do not know whether we will ever get it. But the focus has got to be, Mr. Speaker . . . and Mr. Speaker, you know from your day job at Fairmont, the customer is king. Now, the customer is king and therefore the focus of our energies as the stewards and protectors of people’s jobs, and the House of Assembly 2184 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
people of this country and the reversal of the slide in this economy, has got to be on getting more custo mers here. I was happy to hear the Minister of Economy, the Honourable Member, Dr. Gibbons, say that the Tourism Authority has been around for a long, long time. He took the words out of my comments that I was going to address to you, Mr. Speaker. It has been around for a very long time. And have not the circumstances . . . certainly has not the economic terrain changed, so much so that we have the opportuni-ty to get right down to the nuts and bolts —getting customers here. Now, the Members of the Progressive Labour Party have spoken, including the Shadow Spokesman for Tourism, Mr. Furbert, followed by the Honourable Member, Mr. Brown, and all of the Members who have spoken . . . the Honourable Member, Mr. Burgess. They gave excellent speeches on bringing the focus to dealing with what we should be dealing with. I will come back to this point. The Tourism Authority is a very old idea. A party partisan idea that has now been parachuted in—alas, now that the OBA are in Go vernment —parachuted into place. And I worry that we are setting ourselves, or the Government is setting itself up for disappointment when the focus and the opportunity for focusing on the customer is there. I heard the Honourable Dr. Gibbons say that we are trying to get the product right and he men-tioned Mr. Dodwell, the Chairman. I am going to men-tion Mr. Dodwell as well. The idea is to get the customer . . . because of the price point, because of the experience in the hotel, because the room the customer is in is a decent hotel room so that the customer can sa y, Ah! I remember that experience. I am going to tell my friends about it. I am going to return. I am going to bring others. That should be the focus. But to focus on an old partisan party theory, an old party policy plan, and we are being drawn down into this silo by the speakers from the Gover nment bench. I listened to the debate so far, the speech by the Honourable and Learned Member and Minister of Tourism so far, and the comments from our side, which have to been to focus on all sorts of things other than the customer. That is . . . Let me make the point good. Because I asked myself, as I perused this Bill that we are generally de-bating now, What did the Bill address? A customer focus? To a degree the principles and objectives on page six of the Bill begin to. But nowhere in that entire list will we see, and when we get into Committee, [will] we see a commitment to the customer so that the things that Mr. Dodwell has been congratulated for now by the Honourable Member Dr. Gibbons, or the things that we can now congratulate the Green family for doing at Fairmont nowhere appear or give us the opportunity in this House as we debate an important mechanism and tool, nowhere does the focus or con-centration land upon customer and getting the cus-tomer through . . . getting the rooms worth $500. I remember the well -known businessman, Mr. Gil Tucker, saying in one of these tourism discussions, Customers will pay. They will pay. They go over to London. They go over to Qatar. They go over to the [Al Ghariya] (I think you know where I am trying to say. That place over there in Qatar.)
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thank you. And they go to Paris. If the room and the experience and the delivery of product are five- star, they do not mind paying—and t hey will pay. Gil Tucker said that. This is where the focus should be. This is where I believe . . . I say . . . and I am saying this not to be—
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Michael J. Scott: You can. You can, because the leadership requires us to at least state that our aim will be . . . not to have Members of the PLP O pposition stand up and say we are concerned that the power of the Board is to fund private enterprise. I mean, we should not be having that debate. We should be having a strong debate on we commend the Minister —the Honourable and Learned Member —for a Bill that drives the debate and the narrative of cus-tomer focus because this is where we need to get. We all accept . . . every Member to a man and a woman who has spoken thus far has indicated that we know —and it has been a departure— we know that this is not going to resolve all matters. It is not a silver bullet. We have heard that over and over again. It happens to be a departure. I can recall the Honour able Member and Minister of Health, Ms. Gordon-Pamplin, sitting right here talking about the Tourism Authority —debate after debate—it was the bee’s knees, it was going to solve all of our problems. But we know it will not. We know it will not. The thing that will solve our problems is to get our customer experience one where they return. Now we know that . . . and there is some symbolism here. And when the Honourable Member, Mr. Furbert, who made a fine speech, spoke of the CEO’s credentials and whether he should be (or she should be) Berm udian, he was absolutely right. Symbolism in Bermuda 2013 —when people are on their knees, economically, in many instances —we need symbolism that says we are employing Bermudians. And the CEO is going to lead the charge to employ more Bermudians. It is funny how the culture is infused with this kind of leadership. It just happens. Using the cottage industry, using the guest house, promoting more Bermudian owners of guest houses, again, is going to promote the experience of the visitor to this country from across the globe to a memorable one where they will click the mouse again and come back and say, It’s almost like coming home. It’s almost like family. House of Assembly
But this is a very narrow focus. This is an administrative tool. And this where Dr. Gibbons’ speech took the debate. I listened to him clearly, carefully. We have got this . . . it is an administrative tool. It is very . . . it is very narrow. When in the ninth month of the Government 2013, we are at the eleventh hour of ha ving to deal with their mandate. It would be the mandate of any Government in these conditions —job cr eation, economic growth. We have got to get emplo yment of young people [who are] unemployed in this country. All of these are critical, mission critical, polit ical realities. We have them in our homes across the country. And all of us in this House probably can speak to young unemployed. Mr. Speaker, I watched Chelsea Clinton. I watched Piers Morgan the night before last. Three bright women—a woman from Africa, Ms. Peggy M ativo, Ms. America Ferrera, and Chelsea Clinton. They asked that question. They fielded this question about unemployment amongst young people across the globe. The question came from a princess of the Mi ddle East. But we have our problem of unemployed Bermudians, too. They need to be responded to. They need to be employed. They need to be put in amus ement parks running those rides. The product . . . the product . . . the opportunity to introduce products at hotels in this country, new hotels . . . and so this is where the focus should be. But the bureaucracy and the bureaucratic v ehicle for tourism, while all well and good, is not the focus in my respectful submission. And I say this not to condemn. I say this like the Honourable Deputy Leader of the party indicated, we want the process to begin. It is five to midnight, it is late in the day and we need to be having the right focus. And to hear Mem-bers of the Government indicate and concede that this is not a silver bullet . . . and that it is putting in place this Authority; well, we know it is not. So let us get on with what we need to be getting on with. Mr. Speaker, I heard the Honourable and Learned Member, my colleague, the Shadow Attorney General, the Honourable Member Ms. Wilson, ask about superannuation. And the question I would ask, too, in the general discussion, is, Will the redundant 47 members of our department have a break in ser-vice? That is an important ques tion for people to co nsider. There are many that are in this House, including the Minister of Finance, who may be able to answer that question authoritatively for us. But that has co nsequences . . . but in these times. So, Mr. Speaker, when the PLP began t he road . . . and it was as early as 1998, I believe that we started off on the right focus because we started off with product redevelopment. It comes back to my opening remarks. We do not need to develop tourism and we do not need a Tourism Authority to develop tourism, we need all energies —the Minister’s bri lliance —to get the developed tourism working again, so that it is employing again, so that it is making Ber-mudian young boys and girls proud to say, Yes, I will go into the industry —again . And we need to ensure that there is inward investment into the product so that growth is taking place and employment, therefore, follows. But to set up yourselves so that we have got . . . we are bound as Opposition to launch an attack on the credentials of the CEO and what will be the symbolism there. It is going to distract from the real needs, the ever present need of now, and the urgency of now could not be clearer. We do not need that. We need us to be focus-ing on a debate on the second pillar of our economy — on the customer. Mr. Speaker, it was in 1998 that we began the policy of product development, and it needs to have been continued. And only today . . . so if we want to take a lesson from anywhere, and if we want to both nurture it and stimulate it, giving credit where it is due, because Mr. Dodwell at the Reefs began it before P eter Green and Andrew and Alexander Green bought that entity at the Fairmont. But we need Bermudian ownership or participation and involvement in a major way. It is going to be symbolic. It is going to send si gnals. It will result in the very ownership and family members of owners directing their children, their nieces, their friends into hospitality. That is just what hap-pens. This is why it is not improper to speak firmly and fiercely about the Bermudian element in tourism in this country. You go down to Jamaica, as many of us have, or the Bahamas. I mean, you find their native indigenous people across the industry. We have had this debate for so long about, you know, how generous we are with having the entire world operate on our floors. But when you have got the vibrancy of your people, then the creative juices of Bermudians are infused into the menu, the drinks, the food and beverage, the delivery of service and we have a good chance, we have an excellent chance, of differentiating our product from our competitors be-cause of the Bermudian peace. And I do not think we have ever given it the broadest possible chance. The Honourable Member, Dr. Gibbons, makes my case eloquently by talking about the number of Cond é Nast awards, the best example we have had to date in our history, at the Reefs. Well, this needs to be replicated across the industry. This should be the f ocus, Mr. Speaker. This should be the focus. And to the extent that the Tourism Authority sets out to achieve all of these principal objectives, may I submit that the customer focus —the custo mer—is the one where we need to be putting the focus. And I hope that this is where they put it because all of these other (a) to (h) objectives, ambitious as they are, including too, you know, to implement the whole National Tourism Plan, you know, civil servant types are going to get involved in that. There is going to be much spinning of wheels. Just . . . keeping it simple. KISS— Keep it Simple Simon. You know, keeping it simple will— House of Assembly 2186 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Michael J. Scott: And I am not going to use that word. Strong, there you go. —will pay untold dividends . . . will pay untold dividends. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now will recognise the Honourable Member from Pembroke South West, constituency 20, MP Susan Jackson. You have the floor.
Mrs. Susan E. JacksonI have been listening and, clearly, Mr. Speaker, there are no experts in this room when it comes to tourism. I am standing here today because at one point I thought maybe I could be the expert in tourism. But I want to make a comment about the concept and …
I have been listening and, clearly, Mr. Speaker, there are no experts in this room when it comes to tourism. I am standing here today because at one point I thought maybe I could be the expert in tourism. But I want to make a comment about the concept and the marketing of our tourism product and how we may have lost our way. You know, we certainly spent the better part of the 1900s in some renaissance, the golden era of tourism in Bermuda. And, certainly, the visitors who were coming to our Island, the amenities that we af-forded them were just amazing. It was a wonderful run for Bermuda, and times were good. But the marketing of any kind of product, including our country, has a life cycle. It is going to go through a series of growth and maturity [periods] and then eventually it will reach a stage where it will outgrow its usefulness and need to be reb orn. And God bless us all, but everybody in the last 20 years or so has had their two cents on how we are going to make it better. We have had concerts and we have had parties and we have done this and we have done that. And, you know, no . . . hey, no dou bt about it, Mr. Speaker. I have a slew of ideas that I would love to share on the floor of the House right now, but you know what? I am no expert. I am abs olutely no expert. I even went away to school thinking that I was going to be that Bermudian that could come back and I could head up the Department of Tourism and that I had the great ideas and we could work it out.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberYou are too modest.
Mrs. Susan E. JacksonBut, Mr. Speaker, I have understood over time that there is something much greater and there is something much more complex than an individual standing with great ideas to make something, a product as valuable as Bermuda, work. So I say today that a Tourism Authority gives us an opportunity …
But, Mr. Speaker, I have understood over time that there is something much greater and there is something much more complex than an individual standing with great ideas to make something, a product as valuable as Bermuda, work. So I say today that a Tourism Authority gives us an opportunity to create an environment for our tourism product, which is Bermuda, gives it an opportunity to have a rebirth and to become a part of the cyclical growth of a product that has been well - defined, well -executed and implemented, and ther efore has an opportunity to reach those golden years again. Because, you know what? We have seen it time and time again with other jurisdictions (if we want to look at tourism). We have seen with other products and services that it is absolutely possible for any product to go from one cycle to another cycle through another cycle successfully. But it unfortunately does not come on the great ideas of an individual. It comes based on scientific . . . and analysis. It comes from business development. It comes from things that many of us do not specialise in. But there is somebody out there, there is a team of people out there that do specialise in this, and they are ready and prepared to come together as professionals to do the job of creating a product and making it successful within the marketing mix, unlike anything that we as (what I am going to consider are laymen) can do. So, Mr. Speaker, I am going to say that a Tourism Authority not only has the opportunity to deal with the complexities of product development, but also has an opportunity to incorporate and introduce the community to a new way of seeing Bermuda, a new way of developing and growing our tourism product. I just cannot even begin to imagine the opportunities that are out there for our tourism product. And if the community can embrace for a moment that with the beginnings of a Tourism Authority we have the oppor-tunity to start to think in another way, it gives us the opportunity to make what is now popularly termed as a “quantum leap.” We do not even know what is out there for us. We cannot . . . we are so busy thinking about the things that are already in our head, the things that have already been done, that as long as we, as the Honourable Member was saying, as long as we keep doing this over and over and over again we are just not going to get something new. And all of the young people that are out there, all of the great ideas that are out there, will come to light if we are given an opportunity to start to see things in a different way. And this Tourism Authority is our opportunity to open that door to say we are going House of Assembly
to at least try to do it a different way. It does not matter to me; it really does not matter to me, the nuts and bolts of a Tourism Authority. What really matters is the fact that we need to put some responsibility and some accountabil ity in a space that will allow us as a community to create something new, and for us to get into the business of attracting visitors to this Island. Do you know that in Asia they have had something like a 22 per cent increase in inbound vis itors since like 2000 —or at least in 2010? I am hoping and thinking that maybe that statistic is still as high each year since. But if they are having double- digit growth in inbound visitors. I do not understand why we cannot even get in the game. And to me, continuing to do what we are doing is just not going to get us in the game, Mr. Speaker. And so I . . . I just . . . I hope that all the Members in the House will take this opportunity to say, You know what? We are going to work this out. We are going to give this Tourism Authority a chance because we have to absolutely at the eleventh hour do some-thing to start to see things a different way. And the Tourism Authority is a good start. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from Warwick South East, constituency 24, MP Lawrence Scott. You have the floor.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottThank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to speak on this because I am directly affected by the tourism product that we have as I work for an airline —JetBlue Airways —that brings tourists to and from the Island. So I am particularly interested in making sure that this Tourism …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to speak on this because I am directly affected by the tourism product that we have as I work for an airline —JetBlue Airways —that brings tourists to and from the Island. So I am particularly interested in making sure that this Tourism Authority, if this is the way that we are going to go and the Gov-ernment decides to go, works. For me, I have to point out the glaring def iciencies in this plan. First and foremost, the Chairman is not qualified to run the Tourism Authority. And I say that because it is funny how the Minister says he is going to pick the best. He is going to pick the best, and the Minister is responsible for picking the Chai rman. But yet the Chairman is not qualified to run the Tourism Authority. And I say he is not qualified b ecause it is of my understanding that if you owe the Government money, you cannot have a Gover nment contract, you should not be . . . and therefore my question is —
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. [Inaudible interjections] POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: The Honourable Member is misleading the House, and I hear the Opposition Leader interpolating. The Honourable Member does not owe the Government money.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you— Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: And it is not his company.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. And I think we need to stay away from that, Honourable Member.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottAll right. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. But the thing is that the Chairman who is the most important person, who is appointed by the Mini ster, is supposed to be the representative of the cou ntry. But yet . . . and in this Authority has to actually be the …
All right. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. But the thing is that the Chairman who is the most important person, who is appointed by the Mini ster, is supposed to be the representative of the cou ntry. But yet . . . and in this Authority has to actually be the one that polices other entities. And if they do not do what is prescribed by law, he, the Tourism Author ity, is the one that has to impose fines, and so on and so forth. But yet the establishment that the Chairman was last with went defunct. And if this is the person that is supposed to . . . cannot manage one property, how are they going to— Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order, Mr. Speaker, point of order.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. POINT OF OR DER [Impugning integrity] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Mr. Speaker, I do not know what the Honourable Member is talking about. The Honourable Member needs to be clear. If he is going to impugn the integrity of the Chairman of the Tourism Authority, he needs to be …
Yes.
POINT OF OR DER [Impugning integrity] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Mr. Speaker, I do not know what the Honourable Member is talking about. The Honourable Member needs to be clear. If he is going to impugn the integrity of the Chairman of the Tourism Authority, he needs to be specific in what he is saying. Now, what entity went defunct? I do not know what the Honourable Member is talking about.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: He is going down a sli ppery slope here.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottSo should I mention the 9 Beaches, Mr. Speaker, or not? Or just —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust carry on and just be careful about the language you use. House of Assembly 2188 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottOkay, Mr. Speaker, because the Minister asked for me to be specific, but I am going to be guided by you, Mr. Speaker. The thing is, Mr. Speaker, is that on top of that there is no accountability when it comes to the financ-es of this Tourism Authority. The Tourism …
Okay, Mr. Speaker, because the Minister asked for me to be specific, but I am going to be guided by you, Mr. Speaker. The thing is, Mr. Speaker, is that on top of that there is no accountability when it comes to the financ-es of this Tourism Authority. The Tourism Authority could in theory (to be mindful of my language) in theory the Tourism Authority could be giving out their money to friends and family and then are protected under the (with no accountability) and then are pr otected under this piece of legislation if they are caught doing something wrong . . . they are protected and have no consequences.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottOn page six, it protects them against consequences because nobody can sue or bring a case against anybody who is part of the Tourism Authority. So they are protected if they do som ething wrong, Mr. Speaker. One thing that I realised is that . . . and we have …
On page six, it protects them against consequences because nobody can sue or bring a case against anybody who is part of the Tourism Authority. So they are protected if they do som ething wrong, Mr. Speaker. One thing that I realised is that . . . and we have touched on it before, about redundancies. They say that there are redundancies but no one is going to be fired and everybody will have a job, but what it sounds like is that we are now in almost somewhat of an ethical conundrum where Government ethics differ from business ethics. You can do something in bus iness and it be considered professionally ethical, but those same professional ethics are considered unet hical in Government. So, therefore, and where am I going . . .
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberGive us an example.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottAn example is if someone is calling for a contract, they could fly somebody e lse to meet them on a private jet or something like that — [Laughter and desk thumping]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottBut when it comes to politics and Government then it is not right. [General uproar]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottMr. Speaker, I do not want to be long, because a lot of my colleagues have already touched on things. But the Honourable Member that just took her seat said one thing that, to me, stood out. That Honourable Member said that there is a team standing by ready to …
Mr. Speaker, I do not want to be long, because a lot of my colleagues have already touched on things. But the Honourable Member that just took her seat said one thing that, to me, stood out. That Honourable Member said that there is a team standing by ready to come in, and to me that sounds like a foreign team is ready to come in. It sounds like . . . it gives the impression that there is somebody that is not here on the Island that is ready to come in and be part of this Tourism Authority. I wonder what is r eally going on because —
[Inaudible interjections]
Mr. W. Lawrence Scott—the President of the Uni ted States would never be a non- American. The Premier of this country, by our Constitution, has to be Bermudian. The 36 of us have to be Bermudian. Why? Because we represent Bermudians. How could you even not consider . . . how could you …
—the President of the Uni ted States would never be a non- American. The Premier of this country, by our Constitution, has to be Bermudian. The 36 of us have to be Bermudian. Why? Because we represent Bermudians. How could you even not consider . . . how could you even think about having somebody that is not Bermudian representing Bermuda on not just a local scale but an international scale. Mr. Speaker, in my other job, JetBlue Airways has won numerous awards and is a trendsetter and a leader in aviation. Why? Because they do not necessarily go out and headhunt for the best on pa per, they headhunt for people that believe in the product , people that can live t he product. They use people that can grow with the product. So any person that you bring in will have to learn about the product , which means that any Bermudian that you pick , even though on paper they may not have the qualifications ( as someone who is not Bermudian) but yet you have somebody who believes in the product, somebody who l ives the pro duct, somebody who can grow with the product. So, therefore, the best person is Berm udian regardless! Hands down! [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottSo, Mr. Speaker, regardless the best person— [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottI hear the Government pointing out different people in the Government who are not Bermudian . . . but— [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottThat are not Bermudian. But I stand by my words. The best person is — House of Assembly [Inaudible interj ections]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottAnd the Minister of Finance must be very mistaken because I did not hire an ybody. I did not hire anybody. I was hired, Mr. Speaker. Remember? I was hired on December 17th, so if I was able to hire somebody in Government prior to that . . . mercy, …
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottBut, Mr. Speaker, going back there is one thing I am noticing that this Gov-ernment is saying . . . because my parents raised me and told me that I could be whatever I want to be, Mr. Speaker. But what I am hearing from this Government is that, as …
But, Mr. Speaker, going back there is one thing I am noticing that this Gov-ernment is saying . . . because my parents raised me and told me that I could be whatever I want to be, Mr. Speaker. But what I am hearing from this Government is that, as a Bermudian, you can only be what we say you can be.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottThat is not the culture. That is not the Bermuda that we should be living in. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order, Mr. Speaker, point of order.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPoint of order? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: The Honourable Member is misleading the House.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI do not think that was said, Honour able Member. I think you need to . . . you need to wit hdraw that. That was not said. [Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIt was not implied. If you can just wit hdraw that.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottI will withdraw that last comment, Mr. Sp eaker. But there is no motive, there is no incentive. If we bring in somebody and say that we are bringing in the best, what is the incentive for the youth of today to try and aspire to the great heights within …
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottAnd the Honourable Minister of Finance says they will replace him. But there is nothing in the legislation that says that that is what they are going to do. So, therefore, they are not bound to do it. Mr. Speaker, I urge . . . I urge this Gover nment …
And the Honourable Minister of Finance says they will replace him. But there is nothing in the legislation that says that that is what they are going to do. So, therefore, they are not bound to do it. Mr. Speaker, I urge . . . I urge this Gover nment to look at the CEO of this Tourism Authority to be Bermudian. I also urge them to look for a qualified Chairman, and in that I will take my seat.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from Pembroke West, constituency 19, MP Jeanne Atherden. You have the floor.
Mrs. Jeanne J. AtherdenMr. Speaker, I am so di sappointed to have to stand right now, because it just seems to me that the tone of our discussion is j ust starting to go down. I do not understand it. I thought we were coming here to debate the Tourism Authority Act and …
Mr. Speaker, I am so di sappointed to have to stand right now, because it just seems to me that the tone of our discussion is j ust starting to go down. I do not understand it. I thought we were coming here to debate the Tourism Authority Act and we have gone off into so many different direc-tions and now starting to (if you will) attack people's character. I must say right from th e beginning that I am assuming that everybody that is in this House today came here to do the peoples’ business and to go on the basis that we are all trying to do our best efforts. I am not going to impugn anybody’s reputation or their motives. And I woul d hope that we would stop doing this. We are not turning around and setting a good example for the people out there who believe that they want to aspire to be like us. When you start talking about aspiring, I do not have a problem with the fact that the C EO is . . . when we go out and look for the CEO that we go out looking for the best. Bermuda has always believed that we want the best. We want the best in our people We want the best in the people that come here and run the businesses. We want the best companies to come here. So when I look at this ad, I am going on the basis that we are striving for the best and we are making sure that when the person comes and takes over this job they will do the best for Bermuda. There are some things in here that I think we need to pay attention to because, Mr. Speaker, if you will allow me a moment just to read a couple pieces about that. This indicates that —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIf you say where it is coming from.
Mrs. Jeanne J. AtherdenI am reading the ad that was in the Royal Gazette on Tuesday, September the 24th. It is the ad that says, “Tourism in Transition, Chief Executive Officer.”
Mrs. Jeanne J. AtherdenIt says, "This is a senior executive position that is responsible for leading a competent group of professionals towards the realis ations of its objectives." The second thing that is ind icated here is that, "He or she will have substantive experience and success in managing people, venHouse of Assembly …
It says, "This is a senior executive position that is responsible for leading a competent group of professionals towards the realis ations of its objectives." The second thing that is ind icated here is that, "He or she will have substantive experience and success in managing people, venHouse of Assembly 2190 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
dors, and projects." The third thing that captured my attention is that, this person will have, “Superior interpersonal skills reflecting leadership ability, the per-sonality to inspire confidence and build teams and the flexibility to work in a dynamic environment and to manage a large advertising program." Now to me, Mr. Speaker, I am hoping that any Bermudian that is out there will look at this ad and say, I want to come back to Bermuda and I want to lead this organisation, because we have people that are out there. Why are we automatically assuming that we do not have people, that —automatically — there are not people out there getting their experience and expertise and are willing to return to Bermuda? I am assuming that that will happen but if (unfortunately) a Bermudian chooses not to come back for whatever reason and we have to hire an exper ienced, qualified non- Bermudian, I am expecting that that individual will put a team around him that will i nclude Bermudians that will learn and grow because everybody knows you want Bermudians to be part of the organisation, but also everybody knows, Mr. Speaker, you do not promote someone just because your name is Bermudian. You promote people on the basis of their expertise, their experience and what they are going to bring to the table. We have seen too many instances where people have been promoted and not had the requisite skills and ability. We have done more damage to pe ople by not turning around and making sure that they have had the training and the opportunity. Mr. Speaker, I am assuming that that will not happen, but having said that, I would like to get back to the discussion on the actual legislation that we were supposed to be here to look at. I was really glad (and the Member is not here) Member Derrick Burgess did say that he hopes that the Authority will work and it is not about politics b ecause that to me set a good tone. It is on the basis of that tone that I am going to continue because I believe that that is the objective that we have here, that we are creating a Tourism Authority because we want to take the politics out of tourism. I think we started off doing that but slowly we have found ourselves being sucked into lots of other issues which are really not directly about the Tourism Authority. We are providing a new entity. We are creating something different. It has already been stated that this is going to be the single voice that will evolve Bermuda into a world-class tourism destination. I want to remind all of us in this House h ere, at one stage we were the leading entity in tourism. People used to come here and look at our product and talk to us and try and find out what we were doing. But we have started to listen to our own market-ing. We have started to forget how we got here. We got so fat that we stopped being lean and now what has ended up happening is that we have not grown the way we needed to grow. Therefore, I am saying to you, Mr. Speaker, that Bermudians have to know that the time is now for us to change our direction and this is part and parcel of it. We have to do something di fferent. We have to close the gap and get ahead of the game again and this time we have to make sure that we keep running. The fact that we shape world tourism and that we had talented people who left Bermuda and they created quality and all sorts of things has been talked about by Members of the Opposition. That is true. But over time we have lost that edge. And if this new Tourism Authority is put together, I am certain that that is the type of thing that they want to do. Nobody wants to run an organisation that does not succeed. And the way it is set up . . . it is set up in a way that they will be held accountable for what they need to do. Mr. Speaker, as far as I am concerned when I look at the way it is set up and by the fact that goals are there, I am prepared to trust that this is the direction that we need to go and I would like to think that Bermudians will also believe that as well. The other thing that I want to say, and if you look at the Bill itself, and I am looking at page six (I am just talking about it in general terms), this is talking about the objectives just to say that there are new o bjectives in here which (when we talk about it later on if necessary I will reiterate) but it is talking about educ ation and training. The only reason I am saying that is because there was some concern expressed earlier in the general debate about whether Bermudians were being trained and what we were doing with respect to educating them and making sure that they were going to grow in their country, and I would like to think that by seeing these things in there it makes people feel that that is going to happen. Also, the other thing that I want to relate to is the fact that this new Authority allows the Board to fund private enterprises up to $1 million. I do not have a problem with that because there is also the caveat there that the Minister of Finance has an opportunity to be able to see what is happening. You know, som etimes we forget that when we made concessions to hotels by the Hotels Concession Act we were giving away equally large sums of money. We just did not do it in the way that is done here. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that, you know, when I sat in another place a while ago, we used to talk about needing to help hotels survive and because it helped Bermuda grow and we talked about this was in the national interest —well, the national interest has not changed. We still need to help hotels grow and this is the way we are going to do it. I just want to say that making hotels more eff icient is definitely a worthy goal. Getting more Berm udians into the industry is also a worthy goal and I ex-pect that the new Tourism Authority will address this. I am prepared to trust the new Board to carry out the new mandate. I am also prepared, as I said earlier, to trust them on this selection of the new CEO. House of Assembly
And last, but not least, I just want to remind ourselves that we used to have another pillar of the economy and that was the (if you will) the international business. We had to make changes in that because equally we became complacent and we had to change our model, and I just want to say that if we do not change our model we run the risk that the Bermuda as we know —the standard of living that we have grown accustomed to, we will not be able to get ourselves back on that track. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, all I just wanted to say is that there is a real concern that if we continue to live in the past and if we do not try and get ourselves into the 21 st century, the heyday that we used to have is not going to turn around. We have to repl icate and recreate a new one. Last but not least, there was the suggestion — and I am sorry that the Honourable Minister Burgess is not here —when he talked about golf and all the other things that we used to bring to Bermuda and attractions, I just want to let him know that right now on a weekend at all the golf courses you can get tee times because there are not that many visitors here, and you can get them a week in advance and a day before, because the industry is suffering and we have to do something different. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and I look forward to the individual discussions and that we will go ahead with this Tourism Authority. Thank you.
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, thank you. I am going to recognise the Honourable Member from Pembroke East. He has been trying —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPembroke South East. He has been trying for quite some time now. The Member from Pembroke South East, constituency 21, MP Rolfe Commissiong. You have the floor.
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongMr. Speaker, thank you for the acknowledgement here. It certainly has been a fairly interesting discussion that has taken place around the Bill entitled Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013. If I may, though, I would just like to preface my remarks by wondering if we can get a mutual agreement …
Mr. Speaker, thank you for the acknowledgement here. It certainly has been a fairly interesting discussion that has taken place around the Bill entitled Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013. If I may, though, I would just like to preface my remarks by wondering if we can get a mutual agreement on the part of the Members that we will desist from using shock -worn clichés at least for one year. Two clichés that come to mind are, (a) the one that states that the definition of insanity is someone doing the same thing and expecting different results which we hear quite often here usually without any attribution whatsoever and, of course the other one—(b) this one has been going right up on the charts of late, it is probably up at number two or number one, that is the frequent and overused term “the urgency of now” which of course was popularised by President Obama of the United States. I w as just wondering if I could get the cooper ation of our Members that we will desist from any fur-ther use of shock -worn clichés.
[Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongMr. Speaker, with respect to the issue at hand I heard a Member earlier and I cannot readily identify who it was (or recollect) who posited that Bermuda's growth in tourism, its presence in tourism, really begins around 1883. I contend that Bermuda's decline as a major "tourism power" (quote/unquote) …
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the issue at hand I heard a Member earlier and I cannot readily identify who it was (or recollect) who posited that Bermuda's growth in tourism, its presence in tourism, really begins around 1883. I contend that Bermuda's decline as a major "tourism power" (quote/unquote) probably takes place around 1983. So, we had this hundred- year period from 1883 to—I admit arbitrarily I am setting this historical timeline of 1983 —as being the span of which Bermuda's tourism continued to have extraordinary growth and continued to grow and to gain strength from decade to decade. It was a period that saw Bermuda as the unalloyed champ for much of that period in terms of resource - style tourism. Mr. Speaker, we also know that during that period tourism was the lifeblood of Bermuda. Certainly there was no other pillar to our economy that could even begin to rival the type of rewards (if I can use that term) that tourism conferred upon Bermuda. I would say that the Golden Era certainly comes from the post -World War II period probably from the 1950s up until (as I said this somewhat arbitrarily set period of) 1983. You know, Mr. Speaker, I remember you were a good friend of my father, after we had left Cup Match in Somerset, he had left early from his vocation at that time which was owning and managing a Crown and Anchor table at Cup Match which he did for at least a couple of decades, and he had to leave early as he would do to get home to prepare himself for work with the Esso Steel Band, and I remember co ming in the car, around that time 1983, 1982, and my father was saying to me, Rolfe, I am going to have to leave Bermuda. It may have been around 1981, act ually, because work had begun to dry up within the ho-tel industry. We had seen a number of nightclubs close which were the lifeblood of not only the Esso Steel Band but many other outfits of the day from Hubert Smith Sr.'s band, the Coral Islanders, to the Talbot Brothers —everybody was affected by this. At that time we had just got the announcement that the Sonesta Beach (formerly Carlton Beach for those over 45 years of age) was also going to close its nightclub or repurpose that space. So my father said to me, Rolfe, it was going to be time for him to leave. All of us were adult children—the boys in the family. And I under-stood what he was talking about because in essence House of Assembly 2192 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
the livelihood of many within the industry began to dry up and for others totally disappear. We saw this gradual decline from 1983 to the present and it has largely been unabated. I think anyone would agree with that. But, of course, Bermuda had a saving grace. And that was that around that same time we saw the growth (or shortly before that, talking about the mid1980s, early 1990s) of Bermuda as a major off -shore international business domicile. Certainly, I am going to say the following without any fear or favour b ecause I know it has been the custom of us to be unal-loyed cheerleaders of the growth of international bus iness. But I think it would be remiss on us when we talk about the structural decline of tourism, which I do not believe that this Bill and the Authority will begin to address (I will get to that in a little while) . . . we are loath to acknowledge the role that the growth of inter-national business had also played in the gradual de-cline of Bermuda's competitiveness within the tourism secto r. Quite simply how that was accomplished was by the presence of international business. While being a God- send to our economy [it] had also begun to raise the standard of living in Bermuda and thus the cost of living in Bermuda. And thus I believe that f rom an economic standpoint [that] had begun to undermine and erode the competitiveness of Bermuda as a tourism destination. I think that we would be remiss without acknowledging that. The other factor that we have to acknowledge is the fact that much like the United States of America in which after World War II strode like a colossal upon the global economy having few, if any, real compet itors save that provided by the Eastern Bloc —after all, Germany and Japan (now economic powerhouses themselves) were on their knees —America became an economic powerhouse that was able to create a major middle class to ensure that the rights of workers were protected, to ensure that the American standard of living during that period from 1950 until the 1980s continued to rise (or at least until the 1970s) without much in the way of decline. There was no major co mpetitive entity or other nation that could compete with America. America was the dominant hegemonic po wer. People need to understand that Bermuda as well, in tourism, almost had the same position in terms of the global economy, particularly, as I said, in that period from 1883 at least up until the 1960s and 1970s when we began to see greater competition take off particularly in the Caribbean and in other destina-tions. So by the time you get to the 1970s and 1980s, Bermuda had also begun to experience significant competitors coming particularly from the Caribbean which I also believed to help undermine Bermuda's competitive position particularly in light of the fact t hat we were beginning to price ourselves out of significant segments of the market. I do not believe that the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act, focused as it is in terms of creating an Authority whose main preoccupation appears to be on marketing and promotion, is going to be the answer to address these structural problems. Metaphorically or symbolically another speaker, again I fail to recall who it was, talked about the $500 a night for a room —the Honourable Michael Scott, I believe, I think he acknowledges —the $500 a room night for a room that looks like it came out of the 1970s or 1980s. You see, Bermuda used to be able to attract very wealthy WASPs, primarily, from the east coast of the United States. (WASP is an acronym for White Anglo -Saxon Protestants.) These were the people of the American elite. So from the 1880s right up until the 1970s or 1980s, Bermuda was a favourite destin ation for many of these people who were the movers and shakers of American finance, Government, the arts . . . Bermuda was that place. Bermuda is no longer that place.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongThe answer, Mr. Speaker, again lies with us beginning to address the structural issues. How do we attract the type of investment that will see Bermuda gain position more in a way that at-tracts the descendants (if you will) the symbolic chi ldren and grandchildren of the wealthy Americans and …
The answer, Mr. Speaker, again lies with us beginning to address the structural issues. How do we attract the type of investment that will see Bermuda gain position more in a way that at-tracts the descendants (if you will) the symbolic chi ldren and grandchildren of the wealthy Americans and others who came here during that period that I mentioned? That is the challenge that we have and in light of that we also have to acknowledge that culturally Bermuda is not what it was then. You see, because besides (I think, in my view) international business playing a role that essentially began to price Bermuda in a way that was making it more difficult to attract middle -class American tourists. I believe it also has had profound effects on our culture. Each industry brings its own culture. The culture of resource- style tourism, for example, was one of laid- back, a culture that was more relaxed, but it was a business culture. It was a culture predicated around service, treating the customer as king—that was the culture that is a by -product of that industry. We were successful because we were able to reflect the cultural values that were essential to the growth and success of that industry. That is not the culture we find around international business. That is not to say that international business — and I want to reiterate— has not been a welcome addition to what Bermuda has to offer globally, because it has. Like I said, to some degree it was a lifesaver during that early to mid- 1980s period. But we also have to acknowledge that its growth was problematic in terms of how it had its effect on Bermuda as a tourism destination. We are still grappling with it today. The culture that surrounds international business is one that is all efficiency -driven —one that says that getting House of Assembly
the job done is uppermost. It is not one that is built — that is necessarily one that is like the international tourism industry, I should say, that prides [itself on] taking your time, interacting with the customer in a sense and making the customer king in that sense as we know that the tourism had accomplished or what tourism required during that period. This is, I think, the dilemma that we find here. How will we begin to turn tourism around? It has to be built upon the reality of who we are today and not on a nostalgia for what was 30 or 40 years ago. I think that is something we are still, as well, struggling with. Mr. Speaker, we know that what we have seen here has been an attempt by the Government (some say) to privatise a core Government function in terms of this Bill. But I do not know if it is a pure ex-ample of privatisation because in privatisation, you know, you sell off a Government asset to private i nvestors and they take it and do as they will to try and make it a success for them and their investors. This is one that has brought about . . . a privatisation that has been brought about but is one that is essentially going to be funded by the Government, subsidised by Gov-ernment monies but with little in the way of account ability, which for us on this side of the political aisle is problematic. We do know, notwithstanding that that has been a prized objective ideologically of some of those on the other side, particularly those Members who had their provenance with the United Bermuda Party going back as one Member alludes to the 1980s as well, as you know privatisation and outsourcing. Particularly privatisation was all the rage during that period. So their moment has come and now they feel that they can enact in a long- held and cherished agenda that they have sought to foster upon Bermuda for decades. I, again, do not think though that this particular effort is going to accomplish the goal that we seek. Mr. Speaker, just one other note on privatis ation. Why do we not go further? I heard people talking about privatisation of the post office but, why do we not just privatise the Finance Ministry as well? I am sure that PriceWaterhouseCoopers would take it o ver! DCI—privatise them —maybe a company like Inter - Island Communications, right? I mean, you know, we know that those who are ideologically speaking very much in tune with this type of agenda, what I would call (I guess) the Bob Stewart view of the world—t hat Government is bad, or that Government has no value, it can do no good and that all virtue belongs in the private sector, and they ask us to take this leap of faith with them (because it is a leap of faith) that by doing such, by taking such action as we are seeing here, that all will be well and that we will, again, see tourism in this case rebound from its dismal showing over the last quarter century. Again, we do not feel that that will be the end result. I am just going to close by saying that they have in effect or will in effect create an industry -dominated organisation, a private corporate entity that will advocate on behalf of the industry. I guess in some ways you can say it is similar to ABIR and ABIC which are, I guess it would be international business advocacy entities which are found in the insurance sector. I am still trying to grasp my mind around the structure (as many of our Members are). We do not necessarily wish that this not succeed but again, How will this Tourism Authority begin to address the structural problems as I said which have bedevilled Ber-muda tourism for the last quarter century? I have no confidence from what I see here that the authority is or has the tools to begin to accomplish that. What I do see is that you have had those who have had an ideological obsession with privatisation trying to use that tool as one which can begin to solve the riddle, the conundrum, surrounding Bermuda tourism. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. Any other Honourable Members who would care to speak? The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from Southampton East, constituency 29, Shadow Minister of Health and Seniors, MP Zane De Silva. You have the floor.
Mr. Zane J. S. De Silv aThank you, Mr. Speaker. History will show that the former Premier of the Progressive Labour Party, Mr. Ewart Brown, and former Tourism Minister, said many times that a Tour-ism Authority was not a bad concept and I think many on this side agree. However, we all know that it is …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. History will show that the former Premier of the Progressive Labour Party, Mr. Ewart Brown, and former Tourism Minister, said many times that a Tour-ism Authority was not a bad concept and I think many on this side agree. However, we all know that it is not the silver bullet and like most concepts the true power lies in the human beings that implement any plans that we may make. There have been other countries that have had Tourism Authorities for years. I would like to point out Barbados, for example. But the key to their success has been the ability to get things done. So the Tourism Authority is not just a name. You can name it what you like. You need people to implement plans and get things done. The Honourable Dr. Grant Gibbons said earl ier when he spoke, when we were discussing the fund-ing, or lack thereof, from some of the hotels in market-ing their product and Bermuda, and the Honourable Member said that hotels spend large sums of money for marketing. But what the Honourable Member did not remind the Bermudian public and the taxpayer of is all the concessions that the hotels get in order to market their product and Bermuda. Do not get me wrong. I see nothing wrong with that. I support that. But if you are going to tell the story, let us tell the whole story. Let us not leave the little fine details that are important out when we are House of Assembly 2194 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
talking about who is spending money, how much, and where that money comes from, because at the end of the day if you look at it and you weigh it out, you will probably find that the hotels are not paying that much at all. We all know that in this House just recently we passed concessions totalling more than $14 million. Nothing wrong with that —we support it wholeheartedly. Nothing wrong with supporting any of the conces-sions that we have passed, but let us remember that the Government —the past Government and the Go vernment of the day —are working very hard to give them concessions so that they can market their prod-uct and Bermuda. Now one hotel recently declared a heavy div idend, I understand. Now, I hope that all the hotels are being made to account for these marketing dollars. I think those on the other side may know the entity of which I speak but, Mr. Speaker, let us make sure that the hotels are honest brokers as well in this game because we up here in this House, whether it be us when we were Government or the present Gover nment, are working hard to see that we give them all the support that they need. There was a smart, one little off -the-cuff comment maybe when there was talk about some marketing dollars and someone mentioned (as they do) because, you know, we have mentioned a few things today and you quite rightly try to bring people back on point, but let us not forget that when the name GlobalHue is mentioned, you know, we know how the Opposition at the time certainly rode that horse, Mr. Speaker, we will know that the record shows that the most air arrivals that we have ever had in our history was when GlobalHue was marketing Bermuda and its product.
[Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaOh yes! Oh yes! Mr. Speaker, 2007 was [when we had] the most tourists that we have ever seen in Bermuda in our history. POINT OF CLARIFICATION Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Point of clarification.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes? Just . . . just . . . Member? Sit down, please. Thank you. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Point of clarification.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: He said air arrivals, now he is back into total visitors. Please be correct in what he says.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, right. I think you are talking about — Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: —Because with air arr ivals, he is wrong!
The SpeakerThe SpeakerRight. It is the number of visitors to the Island not air arrivals.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaIt was the record amount of tourists we have ever seen in Bermuda's history. Ever. Ever! [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThe Honourable Member D r. Gibbons also said that the Chairman, Mr. [David] Dodwell , has the most experience and has been most successful and if we followed his idea maybe we would not be in the sad situation we are today, from Dr. Gibbons. Mr. Speaker, let us not …
The Honourable Member D r. Gibbons also said that the Chairman, Mr. [David] Dodwell , has the most experience and has been most successful and if we followed his idea maybe we would not be in the sad situation we are today, from Dr. Gibbons. Mr. Speaker, let us not forget that that chai rman, Mr. Dodwell, was a Tourism Minister for some time and I think that under his watch was when we saw the most decline.
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. Point of order.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. The least amount of air arr ivals we saw was in 2011.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe least amount. All right. I do not know what point you are trying to make.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust clear the point you are trying to— House of Assembly
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaI am trying to get to a point, yes. You might reme mber things like, Let yourself go, that was the brainstorm of that particular Minister at the time. I say that because it is an important role, the Chairman of this Board. It is an important role. While there …
I am trying to get to a point, yes. You might reme mber things like, Let yourself go, that was the brainstorm of that particular Minister at the time. I say that because it is an important role, the Chairman of this Board. It is an important role. While there has been much talk about the CEO, I think the Chairman plays a major role as well, especially som ething as important as this Tourism Authority. So one has to look at —and I believe my honourable colleague, Mr. Scott, was touching on the point about qualifications. One has to wonder that if you look at past experience and some may say it was a wealth of experience and successful experience under that particular person when he was Minister — we on this side do not necessarily agree with that, Mr. Speaker, and we do not necessarily think that we have the rig ht person. That particular —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Member has a right to give his opinion and I think that is what we are in this House for.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThank you, Mr. Speaker. The Chairman, Mr. Dodwell, also is a shar eholder in the company that has the 9 Beaches lease which owes the Government a lot of money. Now, he may be a minority shareholder but I know Members of the Progressive Labour Party that have been minorit …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Chairman, Mr. Dodwell, also is a shar eholder in the company that has the 9 Beaches lease which owes the Government a lot of money. Now, he may be a minority shareholder but I know Members of the Progressive Labour Party that have been minorit y shareholders of companies and in this House when those, the current Government Members of Parliament were on this side, and, Mr. Speaker, you will be very aware of how some of the Progressive Labour Party Members caught flak week after week after week. A lot of them unsubstantiated. I will just mention Cedar Beams for one. Okay? So, if you are going to be the front man when you are representing a company as a minority shar eholder —right, he is a front man because I remember when 9 Beaches first came out, the picture, Mr. Dodwell’s picture, [was] blown all over the paper, 9 Beaches in the background. So if you are going to take the kudos for being the developer that is going to jumpstart Bermuda, you have to take it when things are not going so well either. You have to take that slam, too. So let us not forget that. I point out those few things to say this, that I think the Bermuda Tourism Authority —they are going to struggle. They are going to struggle with blatant conflicts of interest. It is going to be a struggle for them. There is no way, in my opinion, that Mr. Dodwell can divorce himself from the Reefs and his deepening financial issues —cannot divorce himself from it. Bermuda is a small place. Bermuda is a small place. Now, I will say this. I think that the Chairman should be allowed (I am not going to use the word force) to disclose the true condition of the Reefs as part of his deal to be Chairman. I think Bermudians have a right to know.
[Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaBermudi ans have a right to know. If someone is going to Chair the almost $30 million purse of the taxpayers dollar and if you just take note of the few things that I just mentioned, they have a right to know. I would want to know, Mr. Speaker, if …
Bermudi ans have a right to know. If someone is going to Chair the almost $30 million purse of the taxpayers dollar and if you just take note of the few things that I just mentioned, they have a right to know. I would want to know, Mr. Speaker, if I had $30 million and I am going to hire you as my chairman, I am going to want to know some things about you. I want to know what you have been doing. I want to know how you run your financ-es. I want to know what, you know, what are your qualifications. That is where I am at. Whilst I am on that point, let me say this. We know that the Board has to declare their interests and we will get into that when we get into Committee—I will not go into too much detail at this point —but the Board Members have to declare their inter ests. Now I just hope the Minister —I hope Minister Crockwell is going to be a little bit more forceful and authoritative when it comes to declaration of interests. We had an election in December. We had Members that were elected over there that did not declare their interests, so I want to make sure that the Minister is a little bit aggressive when it comes to declaring one's interests. I hope he is laying down a marker with regard to that. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to talk very briefly about the 48 jobs, and we heard for the first time t oday that the people that work in that department will be made redundant. First time today.
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: We di d not say that, Mr. Speaker. The Honourable Member is misleading the House. The posts —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHe did say the posts. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: —I do not know why people getting this confused.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI think that he did say the posts will be made redundant and you [can] read it the way that you want to read it.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaAccept that. Accept that. — House of Assembly 2196 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Mr. Zane J. S. De Silva—Accepted, Mr. Speaker, accepted. No problem. But the 48 jobs will be re- advertised— word it as you wish, we have a few issues. One is, and I am sure—I hope the Minister has the information— What is it going to cost the taxpayer? What is it going to cost …
—Accepted, Mr. Speaker, accepted. No problem. But the 48 jobs will be re- advertised— word it as you wish, we have a few issues. One is, and I am sure—I hope the Minister has the information— What is it going to cost the taxpayer? What is it going to cost the taxpayer? It is easy to say, Well, we are going to give those folks opportunity to reapply. But, Mr. Speaker, do they lose all the benefits that they had built up over the years? Is that lost?
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThe Minister says no. Thank you for that. Great. Excellent. Good to hear because I do not know. W e have been told that any of the staff that do not, [who] are not fortunate to continue to work in that department will have opportunities to work elsewhere. Now, Mr. …
The Minister says no. Thank you for that. Great. Excellent. Good to hear because I do not know. W e have been told that any of the staff that do not, [who] are not fortunate to continue to work in that department will have opportunities to work elsewhere. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is okay and in this climate that is great. Minister, I am glad to see that you are looking out for the people's good. The only thing I caution you on is this: we all know, we have been around for a little while, there are no young puppies in this room —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSpeak to the Chair. The only thing that the Minister needs to be aware [of] is . . .
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaYes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will make sure that I keep my eyes cast on you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI am not the best one to look at, but— [Laughter]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaLook, you do not want me to dignify that comment with a remark, Mr. Speaker, you might throw me out! [Laughter]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaBut, actually, I was talking to someone earlier today that [said] you look very, very nice. In fact, Mr. Santucci was here. Pastor Santucci was here and he said that you cut your hair and I said, well he cut his beard, too, because when I knew him, I played …
But, actually, I was talking to someone earlier today that [said] you look very, very nice. In fact, Mr. Santucci was here. Pastor Santucci was here and he said that you cut your hair and I said, well he cut his beard, too, because when I knew him, I played football against him he had this beard way down here somewhere. We used to call him Bigfoot. But anyway, I digress. [Laughter]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaWith regard to the staff now, all I would ask the Minister to do is consider. You know, you may say, Well, look. Marc Bean is not going to lose his job. We are going to offer him a job over there in Health, or maybe another department within the …
With regard to the staff now, all I would ask the Minister to do is consider. You know, you may say, Well, look. Marc Bean is not going to lose his job. We are going to offer him a job over there in Health, or maybe another department within the Ministry. But let us be very aware that not everyone likes to be shifted. You may move me over here working with Marc Bean and Joe Smith and, you know, but consider, consider. Have conver sations with the people that you are suggesting to move, the ones that do not fit into your plan. Let us give them some serious consideration because I think that is im-portant, Mr. Speaker. There has been much talk about Ministerial interference and the differences between the 2012 Act and this Act. I am a little confused with the Gover nment, Mr. Speaker. I have heard several of the Mem-bers speak to Ministerial interference and how there will be none, but then Honourable Member Atherden was speaking just now, and she said she does not have any concern about the $1 million amount that the Board will be able to spend. She said because the Minister —the Minister —would be well in tune with what is going on so they will not be able to do that. Now this was from h er. Hansard will show you that. Yet you have had other Members who have said that the whole point of this is you have to keep politics out of it, the Minister is not going to be i nvolved. Well, Mr. Speaker, the Minister appoints the Chairman and I think the Honourable Member, Wayne Furbert, said it best. Look, look, let us be honest. Let us be real. If you are the Minister, you appoint the Chairman or you appoint the CEO and you do not see things going quite the way you want. You take them down to Dinghy Club and you (Well, not us. If we were in Government, we would go round Devonshire Rec.) but they go around Dinghy Club and they have a little lunch. And quite frankly, let us be honest, they are told what to do and which direction to go by the Minister. Let us be open, honest and real because that is what happens in the real world. Let us not beat around the bush. I would like to use an example of what I am talking about. Some of us in this room will be familiar with trusts and how trusts work. He would s ay, Well, the trustees run a trust. Well, they may run it, Mr. Speaker, but every trust has trustees. The trustees answer to the protector. Who does the protector a nswer to, Mr. Speaker? The settlor. So, you see this is very close to operating like a trust. The trustees can manage the day -to-day business, they can pay some bills, but they do what they are told and they do what they are told by the protector. And you know what? The protector does what the settlor wants him to do and the minute that things do not quite go as they like, trustees are fired. If the protector does not like it, the settlor fires him. Do you know what he does, Mr. Speaker? He appoints another protector who appoints another set House of Assembly
of trustees. It is no different than this Authority and this Bill. So this nonsense about —
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. What he just defined are the legal principles of trusts.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Those things are legally required and the settlor and the protector have the legal right. That is not contained in the Act.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay. Thank you. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: There is a clear difference.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Member. [Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister, yes. I do not think we can take it as being the fact.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on, Member. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThank you, Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. The point is, the analogy, the example that I was setting, was no different than what the Honour able Member, Wayne Furbert, was trying to say. He said that at the end of the day we can talk all the pop-pycock we …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. The point is, the analogy, the example that I was setting, was no different than what the Honour able Member, Wayne Furbert, was trying to say. He said that at the end of the day we can talk all the pop-pycock we want, all the nice things people want to hear about it is no political interference and [they] have all this independence —not so, Mr. Speaker. Let us be real. Let us be real honest. It does not happen like that. We all know it in this House. It is not going to happen that way. It is not going to happen that way. I would like to finish on this note. Let us r emember, here in Bermuda, where most of our tourism dollars come from and where they w ill come from in the future. Bermuda tourism is not going to get bet-ter—I do not care how hard the Minister works. I do not care how hard the former Minister Furbert worked—Bermuda tourism is not going to get any bet-ter, and we can form Authorities, we can form Boards, we can do what we want . . . until the US economy gets better.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaIt is not happening, Mr. Speaker. I applaud the Minister. I applauded my Mi nister. Guys, look, we all work as Bermudians, I thi nk, to do our part. I stop tourists on the street. I see them, if they have a map, I stop them every time. Every time …
It is not happening, Mr. Speaker. I applaud the Minister. I applauded my Mi nister. Guys, look, we all work as Bermudians, I thi nk, to do our part. I stop tourists on the street. I see them, if they have a map, I stop them every time. Every time I stop. I tell my children, Look, this is what we do . Okay? So we want Bermuda to thrive because when Bermuda thrives we are all going to live a better life. As the Honourable Member, Jeanne Atherden, said earlier, we like the standard of life that we have, or had, and we would like to get the best standard of life that we can. But let us remember, until the US econ-omy gets better we are going to struggle, and we are going to struggle a lot. But meanwhile what I would suggest the Go vernment does —maybe what we should do—is what I call using the Duperreault model. Let us give multimi llion dollar guarantees to developers who say they are going to build hotels. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you very much. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from Devonshire North Central, constituency 13, MP Glenn Blakeney. You have the floor.
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyThank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like to concur with a number of the concerns that have been raised on our side of the House notwithstanding the best efforts of the industry professionals that have over the years put their best efforts in. The interesting irony is that …
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like to concur with a number of the concerns that have been raised on our side of the House notwithstanding the best efforts of the industry professionals that have over the years put their best efforts in. The interesting irony is that not even the experts have proven to be experts, because that is all we have ever done is rely on the so- called experts. I heard one Honourable Member who spoke previously speak to the fact that we need experts and lay people, the layman— it is not always one to make the signif icant impact to make a change not just in the psyche but in the pragmatic approach to any kind of marketing effort or whatever. You would understand marketing from a si mple concept that was used many years ago, and t hat was the concept that Wendy's used when the lady went up to the counter and said, Where's the beef? So it is all only relative. I do not think anyone has all of the answers and not all the experts have proven to be experts, as I said. We have gone to Park Avenue, we have gone all over the US looking for these so- called experts who have come back with all kinds of cam-paigns that the supposed experts in the industry as stakeholders have reviewed and endorsed. Not the House of Assembly 2198 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
least of which is the former Minister who sits here in the House, when under his purview he had respons ibility for oversight of Tourism. Those same experts came through, the D epartment of Tourism experts were there under the directorship of various individuals, and we still did not get it right because there are a number of elements that combine to cause the challenge that we face in an industry that is shifting daily. If you do not start from the core focus being on the end user who is the invited guest to our shores, then you will never get i t right, regardless if it is a Board, regardless if it is an Authority. So what do they look for? They look for, first and foremost, product/quality/price. If you do not have those things aligned, you cannot sell anything when the competitors who have realised what the elements are, that they need to be concerned about and prior itise are doing it, and not just talking about it. If I were to be appointed the Chairman of the Broadcast Commission, I think the Government would have a big problem with that if we were the sitting Government and I was made the Minister.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyIt is just the appearance. It is just the perception. So when you stand to say publicly, or cast a public aspersion that, you know, it looked like the former Government was all about families and friends, and then you not only have a family member of your political party, …
It is just the appearance. It is just the perception. So when you stand to say publicly, or cast a public aspersion that, you know, it looked like the former Government was all about families and friends, and then you not only have a family member of your political party, but a very endearing friend who has absolutely no flaw (as far as I am concerned) with r egard to how he has run his business . . . he has been a shining star as an ambassador for tourism in this country. And I speak to the Honourable David Dodwell. And I will call him Honourable, because he is always active in a very classy way. He may have not gotten it right, but it does not get it right when he has been there, done that, and we are still no better off for the effort. So what has changed fundamentally? There is no change. The players that are going to be making up this Authority are industry stakeholders that have been around all this time and who have also weighed in with their particular schools of thought and opinions regarding where the country should go, even if not in an official capacity. They have been a part of the co nsensus because they talk and they network and they discu ss the commonalities of the challenges they all face as an industry. So what is this really fundamentally about? What is the main feature of this Bill? There is one main feature [and] that is who controls the purse strings. The Authority has been given autonomy with $29-plus million as a resource to do as they will wit hout answering to anyone save and except for present-ing a statement of accounts at the year end. With that can be a retroactive explanation of how they got to where they are to satisfy whoever is asking the questions. We all know about creative financing and creative accounting. So when you meet the challenge with the numbers, you can crunch them any which way you need to [in order] to get the result to make a substan-tive and substantial defence of any criticism that might be a challenge for you to answer. That is where I have a fundamental challenge with the Bill because it is taxpayers' money being used in a private way. Now, if you want the Authority . . . I have no problem playing semanti cs with language. But where is the rubber that meets the road regarding the indus-try stakeholders having skin in the game? It is like you go to Las Vegas and somebody gives you the gambling money or the chips, and if you lose you come back and say, Oh, the technical guy that was supposed to be fixing the machine was not on because, you know, a couple of chips got stuck and I just kept going with it because I was committed to it. Aw, it took everything. So I have some challenges because I think the Authority should have some public accountability by way of the Minister. I think that the Minister should have a degree of authority himself to override because he answers to the public. Otherwise he is insulated and can blame at arm's length another authority when he is supposed to be the authority by having been given the confidence of the Premier to undertake the responsibility. But now the whole Government is insulated with the Authority, and all the pressure is on the Authority, and they could try their best efforts. But if there is not fundamental realisation of those three elements that have to be addressed— you cannot go out and sell milk wit hout having a cow! And if you have the cow, the cow has to be pregnant because otherwise it does not produce milk. You have to understand and you have to start from there. That is what we have failed to do. So, the client we are looking to attract from our gateway cities have all kinds of options, and when they compare product, when they compare price, when they compare q uality for their dollar value . . . there are so many options that they consider better that also has sun and beach with a lot more amenities that are more state of the art, more modern, et cetera, et cetera. If we give this Authority to a group of men of eight —including women—to take on the responsibility of getting it right, whatever that means, based on maybe a directive from the Minister as to what he is looking for, and I think all he is looking for is increased numbers arriving by air, one. Two, he is looking for something that is fundamentally going to motivate people to consider Bermuda because of an improved infrastructure of the product that we have, which tric kles down to the amenities and programmes and social opportunities and social activities where there could be interactivity with the Island and the people on the Island, which is our greatest natural resource. I must House of Assembly
commend the Minister because at least he has done one thing right in attempting to get Bermudians front and centre with regard to our marketing efforts relative to entertainment. But there was some misinformation, and it might have been innocent, because, you know, you are a Minister; you are not always hands -on at the micro -level. But for the edification of him and the pu blic, there were, yes, two auditions. One was strictly for amateurs. It was not a curtain call for all people that were interested who went around to Court Street to audition, and then the second night they were shortlisted. It did not happen like that. How it h appened was the amateurs went there and the best of the amateurs were invited to audition with the profes-sionals who auditioned on the Thursday at Princess. That is what happened. So, again, I use that example because when a Board and Authority wants a Min ister who may not be hands -on at micro- level to hear what they believe he needs to hear, that is all they need to tell him. While they still may be working in progress to really get the real deal and a handle on it, to give him a real reflection of what is current and what is the deal. So that is where there are some dangers there. We have to trust somebody, but we have trus ted many individuals who supposedly had the exper-tise, who have had the resources and hundreds of millions of dollars over the last s everal years with a continuation of a decline in the numbers coming to the country. So just to change for change's sake—that is an easy thing to do. But fundamentally where is the substance? We have a Tourism Plan. I do not see anything in there saying that starting out, here are some things that have been extracted from the Tour-ism Plan, because the Minister and the Government has commended the Tourism Plan as being a good working document —so why not embed that as an amendment that should be at least, or s omething, within that Plan that is directed to the Authority to say we want you to follow this model. It says in the Bill that they can do exactly what they want. Exactly what they want. They do not have to justify it. They can explain it and if the Minister falls out of sort with regard to what he is expecting from them or them going in a slightly different direction, they only really need to give an explanation as to why they did that —they do not necessarily have to do it here if they have consensus and say, Yes, we are doing this regardless of what the Government thinks. We have the mandate and we have the rules of en-gagement and we are accountable to ourselves and we have the $29- plus million. We are going to do it this way because this is what we believe. Can I have a show of hands? Amen! It is done. Now, the Minister has to come back to this Honourable House, his colleagues and Cabinet, his caucus, the country at large, and say, Here is what, here is why, here is how . That is a lot of pressure. I would not want to take on that pressure without ha ving some level of authority outside of just naming the Chairperson for the Authority. Again, I will reiterate. It seems to be more an exercise of semantics, Madam Deputy Speaker.
[Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair 18:10:20]
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyI think that is a shame because we stand to be taking a risk where, regardless of the qualitative data, the quantitative data, we do not have any real input save and except to express what we expect [and] what our desire is. We just transition it to what was, …
I think that is a shame because we stand to be taking a risk where, regardless of the qualitative data, the quantitative data, we do not have any real input save and except to express what we expect [and] what our desire is. We just transition it to what was, as I have heard mentioned earlier, akin to privatisation. We have seen how privatisation has done what has been in the interests of the particular com-pany in a private sector context. You cannot even call 411 and get somebody who is fluent in English to get a local number, to say the least, [let alone] ask them how you get there. God forbid if you pronounce it —if you have a lisp they do not understand and tell you it is not in Bermuda because it is not in the directory. And that is after you go through a process of trying to decipher what they are saying because of the broken English. The consequential result, intended or uni ntended, is that Bermudians are the sacrificial lambs who have lost their jobs, who were not just a source of information but ambassadors even for their own fellow Bermudians, because sometimes you have a quick little conversation of how you are doing today or blah, blah, blah or whatever. We are losing all of that b ecause there is no loyalty to Bermudianisation. Hence the concern brought up about hiring a Bermudian as the CEO —just a concern because of how the ad is worded it could be interpreted any which way other than being looked at to ensure that a Bermudian is encouraged, motivated or incentivised to apply. These are the concerns that my colleagues have been articulating so far because this is real. We cannot play with $29 million and afford to miss the target again. That is the only reason why we raise the conc erns. The Government will have its way, we only have our say. We do not want to hear only what they are saying. We want to ensure that the walk is necessarily in the interests of serving the country to the best of the ability of those who are charged with ensuring that we will improve our tourism numbers in all areas. In all areas, not the least of which is making sure we start here on the Island first, getting Bermudi-ans to believe in Bermuda, in the product, in the necessity for them to retrain, in the necessity for their loyalty to the product and to the country even if they are not employed in the industry, to be walking am-bassadors and walking billboards. So that like my f ather and grandfather used to do, if someone was in Bermuda visiting for the first time, or on honeymoon, House of Assembly 2200 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
and they wanted to get to Horseshoe Bay, and he was heading towards Southampton, he might go beyond to take them a mile further and say, Here is what you are looking for . Out of that you get the recidivist potential with that tourist, because of that experience, [who then] says, Wow, you know what, honey? Next year we are going back to Bermuda. That is what we thrived on, and that is where we became complacent because we became more and more inclined to d epend on the repeat visitor. As someone had earlier said, the definition of insanity is to continue to do the same thing and expect a different result. As a result of thinking that we had arrived and all of the natural beauty and the few amenities we had were enough, while the other jurisdictions in direct competition with us were looking at Bermuda, using it as their platform or the springboard to spring further ahead of us. Then we have the consideration of those who are the industry stakeholders. And hopefully Mr. Dod-well will agre e. They need to be honest brokers, honest brokers with regard to training, with regard to Bermudianisation. He can speak to that because he is a living example— or at least his entity is a living example of the success one can enjoy with long- term commitmen t to the industry by Bermudians. Another place is Grotto Bay where an overwhelming majority of their employees are long- serving Bermudians who do a wonderful job. Another thing that Grotto Bay does very well is sell an all- inclusive concept. Now as anyone in this Chamber or in range of my voice understands, if they have experienced Jamaica or one of the other islands to the south of us, they know the success rate of the all-inclusive. It is an unbelievable experience. That is where the on- island experience is going to, from my experience. I would implore the Minister to have a look, have a rethink to ensure that as we go into Committee that he listens to maybe some of the suggestions that we will propose as amendments, and maybe bring it to a palatable state where he can get the support of the Opposition. We are not against best efforts being made to improve tourism. It is an imperative. There is absolutely no doubt about that as we experience r edundancies and downsizing and outsourcing. The consequential impact is loss of jobs. Governments do not create jobs. Governments create conducive env ironments that facilitate the hiring through the private sector of employment opportunities. That is what Governments do. So with that, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will take my seat and look forward to the remainder of my colleagues who have not contributed so far, to add their few cents. Thank you.
[Desk thumping]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises Mr. Cole Simons, JP, MP, from Smith's South, constituency 8. You have the floor.
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsThank you, thank you, thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have been sitting here listening to this debate from the very beginning and I find it very interes ting. I actually feel very, very sorry for the O pposition because philosophically I know that they support the Tourism Authority. I …
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsFrom the Royal Gazette [22 January 2013]. It quotes a person in this House. It reads as follows, “When I became Minister, I put in place a Tourism Authority. I didn’t use the word Tour-ism Authority, I used the word Tourism Board.” He went on to say, “I think it’s …
From the Royal Gazette [22 January 2013]. It quotes a person in this House. It reads as follows, “When I became Minister, I put in place a Tourism Authority. I didn’t use the word Tour-ism Authority, I used the word Tourism Board.” He went on to say, “I think it’s good but what they are trying to say is going to look no different from what we have in place.” This was said by the then- Minister, t he current Shadow Minister, of Tourism, Mr. Wayne Furbert.
[Inaudible interjections]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsSo, as I said, it is difficult for the PLP on this debate because, quite frankly — POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThe Honourable Member certainly is misleading the House. We never said this is difficult for us. We have always said, and I said on my feet, that we certainly have . . . and I even men-tioned the former Premier saying that we do support. It is the mechanism and …
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThere is no significant difference. [Inaudible interjections] House of Assembly
Mr. N . H. Cole SimonsI have just proven my point. Thank you. [Laughter and desk thumping]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsAnother Minister of the PLP—Tourism Minister, again, former —and I would like to read that.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerWould you like to give us the reference from where?
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsAgain, the Royal Gazette , August 29th. One of our smartest Tourism Ministers, if I may add, “ Former Tourism Minister Renee Webb yester day backed the privatisation of the Tourism D epartment as ‘an excellent step in the right direction’.” POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThe Honourable Member is certainly misleading the House and I will tell you why, because we know that the Royal Gazette does not print the truth. [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsI would like to continue. The [former] Tourism Minister throws her support by also saying the SAGE Commission has it right. You have to deliver or be fired, which has not been the mindset of Government. Madam Deputy Speaker, listen, what we have heard today on the Tourism Authority, we …
I would like to continue. The [former] Tourism Minister throws her support by also saying the SAGE Commission has it right. You have to deliver or be fired, which has not been the mindset of Government. Madam Deputy Speaker, listen, what we have heard today on the Tourism Authority, we have had discussions about the CEO, the Chairman, we have talked about the financial controls, we have talked about the layoffs of 48 people and we are talking about the independence of the finance —and I would like to go through some of these issues because I think the cogent to the argument, the cogent to the transition that the Government has chosen to make, like any organisation, like any business, there will be a transition, and the question is, How do we manage the transition to get the best results going forward? Let us start with the stakeholders. There is grave concern about interference from the Gover nment. Ideally, we would like for this to be independent, but practically the Government of Bermuda is a stak eholder in tourism. Like it or not. So, there is no reason to prohibit a representative from Government to be on the Board as one of the members as a stakeholder. We talked about financing. We will have a regulatory authority. The Minister of Tourism will pr ovide support to the Tourism Authority and we would be foolish to think otherwise. It is important to recog-nise that going forward there will be some type of Government involvement, and if there is no Gover nment involvement at all it makes no sense and you cannot be as productive as you ought to be. At the end of the day, the Government and the Authority will work in partnership with each other. The other issue that I would like to raise, Madam Deputy Speaker, we have had a lot of discussions about the CEO being Bermudian and nonBermudian and I agree. I am a person who s upports Bermudianisation all my life. I am not changing today. But let us be realistic. The reality is we are a comm unity of 35,000 people. We know everybody —
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThirty -five thousand?
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberStill in the 30s.
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsA working, a working community, 35,000 people. We know everybody.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberI don’t.
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsIf there is a person that is Bermudian that has a proven track record that is number one in global tourism, we would have had them back in Bermuda by now. [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsWe would have tried, yes, we would have tried. [Inaudible interjections]
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberSo the decision is already made!
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsExactly, as the Premier said, The PLP would have found them. The reality is at this juncture after 14 years of PLP Government —Renee Webb, Dame Jennifer Smith, Dr. Ewart Brown, a very resourceful Premier — he would have brought a Bermudian home if he had found one. The reality …
Exactly, as the Premier said, The PLP would have found them. The reality is at this juncture after 14 years of PLP Government —Renee Webb, Dame Jennifer Smith, Dr. Ewart Brown, a very resourceful Premier — he would have brought a Bermudian home if he had found one. The reality is we cannot find a Bermudian House of Assembly 2202 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
to fill this role. So, we are putting this out globally to see if there is a Bermudian, and if there is no Berm udian, we want the best person for Bermuda.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWho? What is his name?
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsWe want the best person and if it means going to Singapore, if it means going to Hong Kong, if it means going to the US, if it means going to London, if it means going to Geneva, then that is what we had to do because Bermuda's tourism industry …
We want the best person and if it means going to Singapore, if it means going to Hong Kong, if it means going to the US, if it means going to London, if it means going to Geneva, then that is what we had to do because Bermuda's tourism industry deserves the best. I make no apologies for that. I make no apologies for that. At the end of the day— [Inaudible interjections and crosstalk] [Gavel]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMembers, there is one person who is standing on the floor. If I hear other individuals, I will have him sit down until everyone is silent. Member, you have the floor. Continue to speak to me, please.
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsIf there was a Bermudian of international stature and calibre that can do this job, we would have found that person already. We would have found that person already. So we can sit up here and talk about this issue until the cows come home. We have scouted, we know …
If there was a Bermudian of international stature and calibre that can do this job, we would have found that person already. We would have found that person already. So we can sit up here and talk about this issue until the cows come home. We have scouted, we know our people, individuals who have sent their r ésumés in and have applied for the job for 14 years and it has not happened to date. As I said, and furthermore, we have quoted Gil Tucker as the person that could possibly fill this role.
[Inaudible interjections]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsListen, Gil would tell you himself. Gil and I are very good friends. At the end of the day, Mr. Tucker — [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsListen, we are a community of 35,000 people and we are not going to produce 10 world -class lawyers, we are not going to produce 15 XL-calibre CEOs because it does not happen in the world that way. We are a small co mmunity in Virginia. [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsWe are a small community in Virginia of 35,000 people. They do not produce 100 CEOs of Citibank, Merrill Lynch, HSBC —it is physica lly impossible and Bermuda, in that same model, it is simply impossible to provide people of that calibre on a statistical basis whereby we could have …
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberMove to your next point.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberYes. [Inaudible interjections and general uproar]
Mr. N. H. Cole Simon sWe have to bring reality to the situation, Madam Deputy Speaker. [Inaudible interjections and laughter]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsThe Minister of Tourism has it right. He has accounted for 48 people that will be impacted by this transition. It is all in the planning and it is currently being addressed. As he said, the pos itions may have been made redundant but the people are not being made …
The Minister of Tourism has it right. He has accounted for 48 people that will be impacted by this transition. It is all in the planning and it is currently being addressed. As he said, the pos itions may have been made redundant but the people are not being made redundant. He has made it clear. He has made it very clear.
Mr. E. David BurtThe Honourable Member is mi sleading the House. It has been said by many Members on this side before. You cannot make an indivi dual redundant. If you eliminate a position you are ma king that position redundant.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerI believe he thought he actually said that and he was trying to clarify that, but I am glad we are keeping you awake by you popping to your feet. Member? Member?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMember, you have the floor if you would like to continue.
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsI would like to continue. The other issue that I find intriguing is the Member Blakeney who was talking about financial — House of Assembly
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberHonourable!
Mr. N. H. Cole Simons—control and making sure that who controls the money, controls the finances, controls the agency. Now, this can be a quango- type agency. We have the BDL, we have WEDCO, we have the BLDC and they, again, are similar Gover nment agencies — [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsNo, they are Government agencies and at the end of the day they are quasi au-tonomous Government agencies. At the end of the day this is a similar body. It is run by the trustees, the directors, the Board, at the end of the day. So, similar-ly, with this Board …
No, they are Government agencies and at the end of the day they are quasi au-tonomous Government agencies. At the end of the day this is a similar body. It is run by the trustees, the directors, the Board, at the end of the day. So, similar-ly, with this Board they will have some autonomy over finances once the revenues have been realised. This is not new. This is not new.
[Inaudible interjections]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsThis is not new. In addition, the Minister also has the ability to have his hand in crafting regulations. It is clearly stated in the legisl ation. One other thing I would like to address — [Inaudible interjections]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerNo, from the rest of the ind ividuals. [Laughter] [Gavel]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerEnough! Member, would you stand to your feet, and will you continue? And may I have silence from the rest of the room! Thank you.
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsThe Honourable Glenn Blakeney talked about the core issues: Product, qual ity and price. He spoke about Grotto Bay and how Grotto Bay is doing well and the Reefs is doing well as far as being a role model for other hotels in this country—Bermudianisation, sustainable, good reputation, good quality …
The Honourable Glenn Blakeney talked about the core issues: Product, qual ity and price. He spoke about Grotto Bay and how Grotto Bay is doing well and the Reefs is doing well as far as being a role model for other hotels in this country—Bermudianisation, sustainable, good reputation, good quality service. They have been around. I know Grotto Bay is making good money and they are doing really well. That is attributable to the services that they provide and the commitment to quality. I want to share this issue. I think it is incu mbent upon all of us in this country to make a contribu-tion to tourism and also [to] let institutions know when service is not up to scratch. I will give you an example. I went to dinner about a month ago with my family at one of our hotels, and I am not going to say which hotel, one of our hotels.
[Inaudible interjections]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsAt a major so- called, I will say, four star (because we only have one five- star hotel and the service was abysmal) . . . it was aby smal!
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberDid you report it?
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsSomeone mentioned earlier one of the assessors came to look at hotels that were charging five- star price points for three- star services. I basically could subscribe to that theory that night. A nyway, my story is this —the serving was awful, they did not pay us any attention, they …
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsWe had asked for dessert. They came to us, they served right in front of us, not providing to the right, take away from the left, none of that. It was bad, bad service. [Inaudibl e interjections and crosstalk]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsI said I am not going to tolerate this. The next day I called the managing director of the hotel, I said, Listen, I am not concerned about me. What I am concerned about is the other guests that were in that restaurant that night facing that type of poor …
I said I am not going to tolerate this. The next day I called the managing director of the hotel, I said, Listen, I am not concerned about me. What I am concerned about is the other guests that were in that restaurant that night facing that type of poor quality service. And if you are running a five- star hotel and charging five- star prices, it is incumbent upon you ensuring that your staff delivers high- quality service to the guests of this country .
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberAnd your point?
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsMy point is simple. We all have to call these companies, these restaurants, and do similar things if we want to ensure and if we face this type of poor quality service in our own lives. That is the only way that we can augment and do our bit to …
My point is simple. We all have to call these companies, these restaurants, and do similar things if we want to ensure and if we face this type of poor quality service in our own lives. That is the only way that we can augment and do our bit to also help address the declining quality of service in this country. I would also say (just a continuation on that story) that the general manager thanked me for cal ling. He had his training person call me up the next day and ask me what specifically happened so they could correct the inequities and the poor service that was provided by the staff.
House of Assembly 2204 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
[Inaudible Interjections]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsAnd what staff member. So I registered, I told precisely what happened. Again, they said that is the opportunity for training and improving the quality of service in this country. It is important that we have this and that we bring this type of poor service to the attention to …
And what staff member. So I registered, I told precisely what happened. Again, they said that is the opportunity for training and improving the quality of service in this country. It is important that we have this and that we bring this type of poor service to the attention to our hotel owners and hotel managers. We must do that. It is tied to Authority. And that, again, it is about promoting Bermuda. If you are going to promote Bermuda, you can use your guests to promote Ber-muda.
[Inaudible interjections]
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberNot if they had bad experiences.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMember, I did not hear the comment that was from the side that you responded to. I can only hear what you say. So, if you have something else to add, let me hear it.
Mr. N. H. Co le SimonsWe are talking about promoting Bermuda. At the end of the day the best people to promote Bermuda are our guests.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThat is right.
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsSo if we ensure that our guests have world- class experiences then they will do a more effective job in inviting guests and encourag-ing guests to come to Bermuda. So my story was, we have to do our bit to r eport and make a contribution to our hoteliers when …
So if we ensure that our guests have world- class experiences then they will do a more effective job in inviting guests and encourag-ing guests to come to Bermuda. So my story was, we have to do our bit to r eport and make a contribution to our hoteliers when we recognise that deficient service is being provided, b ecause we owe it to ourselves and we owe it to every individual tourist, every person that goes to a restaurant in this country. The final thing that I would like to address is the fact that we on this side recognise that this has to be a collaborative effort. And in it being a collaborative effort, we will welcome the support of PLP stalwart. We welcome the support of international business. We will welcome the support of Government emplo yees. We will welcome the support of our young people because at the end of the day they are all stakehol ders, and the stakeholders will be invited to participate and make a contribution in Bermuda's strategy once —
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much. The Chair now recognises Mr. E. D. G. Burt, Shadow Minister of Finance, constituency 18. You have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtAs you say, Madam Deputy Speaker, saved by the bell. I have my prepared remarks and I am going to go through them and hopefully they will not take me the full half hour which I have allocated. I find it really remarkable what I just heard from my good …
As you say, Madam Deputy Speaker, saved by the bell. I have my prepared remarks and I am going to go through them and hopefully they will not take me the full half hour which I have allocated. I find it really remarkable what I just heard from my good friend, the Government Whip, and that he, you know, said bas ically that the Government cannot find a Bermudian—cannot find a Bermudian— he said if there was a Bermudian we would have identified one already. We cannot find one! So, Madam Deputy Speaker, I am assuming that this ad is just nothing but a work permit ad so that the Government can go ahead and fulfil their work permit obligations, which is fine. But I hope that as we are in the general debate still and the Mi nister has a lot of questions to answer, and hopefully he will be able to answer them and tabulate them, if he has one in mind, do you mind letting us know who it is. Then, from the Government Whip, we heard that this is a quango. My word! I am sitting here, I am like, we have been hearing all this stuff about this is an independent board and now we have the Gover nment Whip saying it is not independent, it is a qu ango, we exert control, et cetera. I am hoping that the Mini ster can clarify which one it is. Is it a quango or is it a board? I am hoping that I can get that response from the Honourable Minister when he starts. Madam Deputy Speaker, let me go into my prepared remarks. I will get some chuckles from Members of my caucus because I am tempted to say something that . . . I will echo Honourable Member Wayne Furbert when he said we spent half a million dollars to produce this. And I think that if we are ever going to talk about a waste and poor spending of money . . . half a million dollars produced this doc ument. If that is all that was produced, it is by and large a sham. Because we know that we have hired con-sultants, we know that we have gone out to legal f irms to do stuff, we know that we have had other people working on this, and if this is all that was produced by a half a million dollars, then we really need to understand or there is seriously a lack of accountability when it comes to Government spending. I do not want us to get into the trap of saying it is the same because there are some things that are different. But save for changing the name of the Board to the Authority and, you know, removing a few checks that protect the Minister, one Act said, yo u know, with the approval of the Minister, and the other one just says the exact same thing except for no ap-proval of the Minister. There are many things that are similar and there are some sections of the Bill that House of Assembly
were lifted entirely. So I would like for someone to tell me why we spent (and I hope the Minister is going to say) a half a million dollars for this or was there som ething else. Was there some type of strategy? We heard the Minister talk in his brief about how he intends for this Board to be s elf-funding in three to five years. How are we going to do that? One would have expected that the Minister would lay that out so that the House can understand, before appro ving this Tourism Authority, how it is that the Authority in my view is being granted substantially more inde-pendence than the Tourism Board did—how are we going to ensure that the peoples’ money is well spent? We did not have a vision; we do not have any understanding on how this plan —this Authority —is going to transition into independence. Could we be creating a financial sinkhole for the Government? That is the question of which we have to answer. And without having it explained in the Minister's brief we are at a loss. I am hoping that when he has his final statements he can lay out how exactly . . . and that is my question to him. How do we intend on becoming financially independent —or getting this Tourism Authority financially independent —within the next three years? And if that was part of the $500,000 that was paid to various consultants and to law firms insofar as drafting this Bill, et cetera, what exactly are we going to do and how are we going to transition to an independent . . . to something that is not supported by Government funding? This is challenging to me, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is challenging because we are giving Gov-ernment funds away to an organisation who, essen-tially (despite what the Government Whip said) by and large has very few checks and balances on how they spend that money. That is a far stretch, and we are basically giving it to Government. So we can give money to this organisation, and this organisation can invest money in a various number of private sector entities around Bermuda and even internationally, and we have very little control over that. What happens when those investments go bad? Then we have to continue giving them money. Until we understand what the vision is, until we understand how we are going to have this trans ition, we are basically committing ourselves to a fina ncial sinkhole. I do not believe that that is the way to go. I am hoping that the Minister will clarify and give the vision of how the Board will actually transfer itself to financial independence. Now, that takes me to my next point which I wanted to raise, and I want to talk about finances b ecause I think it is very important. Madam Deputy Speaker, you heard my objection earlier on where I objected that there was no financial memorandum attached to this Bill, and we are being asked to set up this Authority and there are sections of the Act that says sums which would be appropriated by the legi slature at a point and time in the future —we have heard the Minister say it will not be forever —but we do not know that. We do not know the plan. We do not know the estimates and I think that it is incumbent at the very least for the Minister to say, instead of saying, we do not know how much it will be, it may be this or it may be that, surely with all the money spent and with all the time to bring a Bill that largely reflects the Tourism Board Bill, with changes, but largely reflects, that they would have at least done this planning. They would have at least been able to come here and say how we are going to wean [the Board] off of Government fund-ing. I do not see that there and it is not there, so I am going to ask for it again because the only things of which this Board has —we are going to abolish the Department of Tourism we have heard, (and we have heard it a little bit different but I will get to that later), we are going to abolish the Department of Tourism and then we are going to create the Tourism Authority which is going to handle all these items. But the only direct money that the Tourism Authority has been gi ven is the 2.5 per cent guest levy which only amounts to $3 million. Where is the other $25 million going to come from? How is that money going to be sent and how are we going to manage that? That is a challenge, if we are looking at $24 million that is going to be a ppropriated by this House to this organisation but we have very few checks and balances on this organis ation. When we appropriate things in the House, Mad-am Deputy Speaker, we know that we are giving to Ministers and the Ministers come back here and they are held to account. The Tourism Authority is not held to ac count. Their money is given and that is it. They can spend the money without any accountability whatsoever. There are some protections but by and large they can spend the money and I do not believe that is the best structure and the best way. In my view, I have no i ssue with the Tourism Authority if the Tourism Authority was financially independent of Government. But when we are going to stand here and commit the Gover nment to giving them Government funds, we need to make sure they are accountable to this House. U nderneath this prescription here they are not account able to this House which, for me, is certainly a challenge. Again, I will ask, How are we going to get to financial independence? How are we going to turn this from something that is corporate welfare, where we are giving private sector people Government money to go ahead and start investing in private sector entities? Let us be clear, that is what this is. That is what this is—corporate welfare. What we are doing is giving private funds for that to happen. So we want to know how are we going to get it to independence and how does this not turn into long -term corporate welfare for House of Assembly 2206 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
the hoteliers in Bermuda. That is what we need to understand. And what I will say, Madam Deputy Speaker, is let today be noted. Friday, September 27th. I believe that there is more accountability needed in this Bill, and if there is something that goes wrong with the funds, if something happens, then the One Bermuda Alliance will not be able to say that that was the Tourism Authority’s problem and not [theirs] because it will be squarely on their shoulders, and I hope that they understand that. There is a level of risk. It is a level of risk of which they have decided to take. They are the Government. They will have the numbers. We can object, but the fact is that if it goes wrong, they are the ones who are going to have to answer to the people of Bermuda for anything which may happen, because there is not enough (in my view) accountability of the Government funds. Now, l et me move on to the next issue which we have heard a lot about recently. And, you know, the Minister came out, it was probably in August, last month, yes, and said that we are going to abolish the Department of Tourism. And I was like, Oh boy! Global operations, finance, administration, promotional services, hotel administration, policy planning —gone. This, of course, from the same Government that says we are not going to cut any government pos itions.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. E. David BurtBut let us be clear. This is som ething different. So, they have decided to eliminate all the positions inside the Department of Tourism —47 people made redundant. I am going to reiterate the question that was asked by the Honourable Shadow Attorney General, How yo u have to make …
But let us be clear. This is som ething different. So, they have decided to eliminate all the positions inside the Department of Tourism —47 people made redundant. I am going to reiterate the question that was asked by the Honourable Shadow Attorney General, How yo u have to make the redundancy payments when a position is made redundant. What is the cost of the redundancy for the 47 people that are made redundant? Because there may be some people in these positions, there may be some people like, You know what? I do not want your other offered job. I am okay. I am going to take my redundancy package. Pay it up. There is a significant amount there. So I am certain that there has been an estimate that has been done for the half a million dollars for transition planning. I am hoping that the Minister will be able to give us that figure today. How much is accounted for—or how much is put insofar as a reserve in the Government's budget for redundancy packages be-cause they are making 47 positions redundant. Whatever arrangements they come to later, we need to know the answer because it is very important. Then we hear earlier, I think it was in a point of order or point of clarification, that hotel administration is not going to be abolished. So now which one is it, Mr. Speaker? [Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair, 18:49:1]
Mr. E. David BurtWhich one is it? Are we making redundant all 47 positions in the Department of Tourism? Or are we making 40 of them redundant and moving hotel administration? Or are we making 47 redundant and creating six new positions in the Ministry of hotel administration and then reapplying for that? …
Which one is it? Are we making redundant all 47 positions in the Department of Tourism? Or are we making 40 of them redundant and moving hotel administration? Or are we making 47 redundant and creating six new positions in the Ministry of hotel administration and then reapplying for that? Which one is it because we are hearing mixed messages, mixed signals. Mr. Speaker, I would have thought that these things would have been covered in the Minister's brief. This is a very large departure and one would expect that these significant issues would have been covered in the Minister's brief. I listened to the Minister's brief intently, I did, but there were some things that, you know, that were not there. I would like to know specif ically—specifically —are we getting rid of 47 positions? What positions are staying inside of Government? What positions are going to be taken up by the Tour-ism Authority, so we can have understanding and cla rity before we move towards passing this important measure? As I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, that we heard about the technicalities of the Tourism Authority Bill and the review through it, but we did not hear very much about the vision for the movement for inde-pendence. Insofar as the movement for the vision to independence, it is also about the movement and the vision for tourism because whether it is a tourism board, whether it is a tourism authority, whether it is a tourism collective or whether it is a tourism posse, they are not going to solve Bermuda's tourism prob-lems. That is not what is going to solve our problems. So it might be a wonderful way of changing the way you are going to minister and it might be a deliv-ery on the OBA's election promise and the UBP's election promise before that, that we will create a Tourism Authority, but the fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that that is not going to solve our tourism challenges. The state of tourism in this country has changed very much over the years and it is something that when I walk on the doorsteps of Pembroke West Central, it is a discussion that I have all the time and it is a discussion that I love because I love tourism. When I came back to Bermuda in 2003, in addition to working in my day job, I took a night job. I was a bartender working in restaurants. I enjoyed it. I really did enjoy it.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThat is where you learned how to make Swizzles.
Mr. E. David BurtAbsolutely, there you go. [Laughter] House of Assembly
Mr. E. David BurtIt wa s from my father, but I was pretty good at making the Swizzle. [Laughter]
Mr. E. David BurtBut, here is where we go, Mr. Speaker, because it is very important. It is all good and well to talk about the Tourism Authority Bill and what the Tourism Authority will do, and we are mov-ing, you know, creating political independence from Tourism Authority to make sure that it …
But, here is where we go, Mr. Speaker, because it is very important. It is all good and well to talk about the Tourism Authority Bill and what the Tourism Authority will do, and we are mov-ing, you know, creating political independence from Tourism Authority to make sure that it is consistent, et cetera, and that is okay because I can say that we can do that . But we could have done it before. We have a National Tourism Plan that we are all on board with, that both sides of the House supported when it came up last year and that we are in agreement with. I understand it and I see the National Tourism Plan is written into the Tourism Authority Act. So I am going to assume that it is going to be their job to ex ecute this plan. But the state of tourism is because when we like—and I have heard a few of them stated before—it is about the marketing mix of what Berm uda is. Mr. Speaker, from business school, we learned the marketing mix of the four Ps: product, place, price and promotion. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. E. David BurtOur place— Yes, yes, Mr. Speaker. There was a time when Bermuda was unique. There was a time when other people did not offer what Bermuda had to offer. There was a time when, if you wanted to go to a wonderful beach at a nice hotel with a nice …
Our place— Yes, yes, Mr. Speaker. There was a time when Bermuda was unique. There was a time when other people did not offer what Bermuda had to offer. There was a time when, if you wanted to go to a wonderful beach at a nice hotel with a nice calm and relaxing atmosphere and, you know, [you could be] sure that the light stayed on in your hotel and you had good infrastructure et cetera, the only place that you could choose to come to was Bermuda. That is where our tourism industry grew from, Mr. Speaker. There are now many other competitors that offer the same thing which we offer and that deals with our product. I understand that there are lots of things that are to happen with the development of our product. I was reading the Government's Throne Speech last night and they talked about a temporary Board called the Product Development Bureau. I have not heard any briefings from that, you know, it i s not particularly the germane of this Bill, but it is germane to the whole issue of tourism. I am wondering what happened to that from the Government. But getting back to where we are. Place. Our place is unique. We are not going to change our place, and our location is good. And our location is what led to our significant tourism growth, because we have to remember, Mr. Speaker, that where we are located is within a very quick flight from the Eastern Seaboard where a large amount of the wealth in the United States was concentrated in our period of rapid tourism development. I am talking about the 1960s and 1970s, and probably from the 1950s. Bermuda’s modern tourism industry grew out of the infrastructure which was built for us for free, by and large, by the United States as a result of the Lend- Lease Act. Because of our strategic positioning in World War II, we got a ready -built tourism infr astruc ture, whether it be airports, whether it be seaports, all those things to cater to tourists. Power plants, infrastructure, to make sure that we were all here and running, so I think it is important to reme mber that. Now we go to price and it is something that we always speak about, but it is something that has to be balanced across everything else. It is expensive to do business in Bermuda. The reason why we have seen properties fail and run into issues is because the cost of doing business in Bermuda is extreme. Now, the costs of doing business in Bermuda would not be prohibitive if our hotels had 80 per cent occupancy year round. They would make money. They would be able to survive. It would not be so much of a challenge. But because of the other things that are happening, our price is in some way, shape or form pr ohibitive, and that affects the final thing: promotion. No matter what we do, Mr. Speaker —you could be the best marketing firm in the world but you cannot sell a bad product to people. And that is it. When people are going to consider all the other things, when they are going to consider the place, when they are going to consider the price, when they are going to consider the product, when they take all those things into the mix, [that] is how they decide. So whether it is an excellent marketing presentation or a poor marketing presentation—there are some places that, when they give out nothing, they do not need any marketing at all. They just need word of mouth be-cause people are like, Oh, you know what? We need to go here. This is great. And things like that. So, Mr. Speaker, we have to understand that that is where it comes from. As I said, in taking us back in history, we have got our tourism development from the infrastructures left in World War II. And by and large it was Hawaii and Bermuda. Both had the infrastructures which were built for the same reason, because of their strategic positioning through World War II and prior to that. Now there are so many other places. The engine of growth in the post -war era by and large was the United States. And we had a captive access to that market. Now the engine of growth is in South America and it is in Africa and it is in Asia. It is no longer in Europe and North America. So that is the thing. And that affects our place as well because our closest captive markets have multitudes of other choices, and the major growth markets where we House of Assembly 2208 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
could enter into mindshare are a lot farther for people to get. When I heard the Honourable Member Susan Jackson talking about tourism increases on a scale of multiple digit percentages in Asia, I almost wanted to say, Duh. Yes, because the Chinese market is growing! Absolutely. I mean, if we are looking at Indian money —the Indian market is growing, the Indonesian market is growing, all that stuff over there—that is where a large amount of the growth is. So we have our challenges, yes. But in saying that, Mr. Speaker, what we need to realise is that other countries have a better and more compelling product to offer tourists than we do. In the 1960s and 1970s when countries to our south could not keep the power on in their hotels, had generators and different things like that, no road infr astructures, et cetera, and all those items of which they faced, the people came here. But those countries saw what we did, looked at what we did, did it better and in the meantime we did not respond. We were compl acent and that is something that both sides of the House can share. Absolutely! Because it did not start with the PLP, but we understand. But there is a reason for that and I think that the Honourable Member, Mr. Commissiong, stated i t well. It is because we did not have to, Mr. Speaker, because our economy changed and we got more and more foreign earnings from international business. That is what it was. The effect was not felt as much. There were still people that were employed, the effect was not felt as much, hotels were still enjoying things from business travellers before the proliferation of i nternational communication and people did not need to travel as much for business meetings as before. So that is what we are facing. This Tourism Authority does nothing to change the product offering that we have. It takes a change of mindset in Bermuda to understand that if we want people to come here, we have to offer them more than what other people are offering them. We live in a global world and global competition, and the exact same way as it applies to international business, that we have to offer them more—it is the exact same way that it applies to tourism. If we are going to change our laws to bring in international business, then w e need to change our laws to attract tourists. If the Tourism Authority is going to be responsible for changing laws, then this is the right thing. But, Mr. Speaker, you and I both know that laws are changed here in Parliament. No matter what the marketing is, you cannot save a bad product. That is what it is. We have to have some very fundamental discussions and a change of paradigm amongst our people, because we have to decide whether or not what we have right now is okay. If we are comfortable in being in the situation, where we are facing massive cuts in Government services, ballooning debt, and we are going to say, You know what? We are just going to stay the way it is, throw some money, keep doing it this way, maybe a little jiggle around the edge. No, Mr. Speaker, we are going to need a massive change of our paradigm if we are going to say, Oh, guess what? You had better go to Bermuda. It is a lot of fun down there. It is a good time. They have nice infrastructure. They have lots of things to do. We have to change our mindset, because the 1950s mindset is not going to work in 2013 when we have competition not just from the south, but we have people with the ability to fly halfway around the world. People are going to many places. If we want our closest people to come and to choose to come here for the weekend, Mr. Speaker, then we have to offer them something better. It is my submission that this Tourism Authority does not do that. Yes, it removes independence. Yes, it might fulfil a tourism objective and an election objective for the One Bermuda Alliance. But it does not fix the challenges that we have. Mr. Speaker, when we get into Committee we will argue the objects of this Bill. This is something that the OBA has delivered on one of their election promises, as I said, as a UBP election promise before. But it in no way, shape or form solves the problem that we have and there is some soul searching that will be needed and some serious debate if we are go-ing to move from the point of positioning of where we are talking about cuts for our people, to where we are talking about we have surpluses so we can rebuild our tourism product. We have surpluses now and we can talk about what less cuts to make. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honour able Member. The Chair will recognise the Minister of F inance, Minister Bob Richards. You have the floor. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have listened to various Members on this subject and it just reminded me of one universal truth as it …
Thank you, Honour able Member. The Chair will recognise the Minister of F inance, Minister Bob Richards. You have the floor. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have listened to various Members on this subject and it just reminded me of one universal truth as it relates to Bermuda and Bermudians, [which] is that every Bermudian is an expert on tourism. Ever ybody. Everybody. We have all kind of grown up in the tourism environment and we feel we know a great deal about the industry, if, for no other reason, by way of osmosis. It is just part of us. We heard a fairly wide diversity of approaches to the subject. I have to congratulate my counterpart, the Honourable Member Mr. Burt. He gave a pretty good speech on this.
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. E. T. ( Bob) Richards: Some of the other comments I would not have given nearly as high marks as I would give the Honourable Member, Mr. Burt. House of Assembly
Sometimes we heard people sort of wandering down memory lane about how it used to be and how great it used to be. You know, all of that is fine and make us feel good; perhaps sentimental and all that sort of stuff. But it does not really have any rele-vance to September 2013. In September 2013 we are facing a tourism industry that is in real trouble. It is an industry, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, facing extinction. Extinction is not just dead; it is a death where you cannot come back —period. It is facing extinction. Pretty soon, if it gets any smaller in capacity, we just will not have any kind of economy of scale to sustain a tourism industry. As I listened to the discourses this afternoon, I thought to myself, I have to remind Members that tour-ism is a business. It is not a hobby. It is not a political football. It is not something that we talk about over the kitchen table, even though we do talk about it over the kitchen table. It is a business. And it is only a bus iness. When we mix politics with business that is like oil and water. One of the essential objectives of a Tourism Authority is to remove the oil from the water. It is to remove politics from business. Now, it is really difficult because tourism and politics have been inextricably linked in Bermuda, at least, probably from the beginning. One Honourable Member said tourism started in 1880- something. You know, he might very well be right. But I bet you, after that first tourist came here, politicians caught on to it and they said, You know, how can we affect this i ndustry? It might be a great industry for us . You know, steam ships can come here and we can do this and we can do that and politics got involved probably from the start. But if only that one point is achieved that would be a tremendous change. Just that one small point. We can talk about all of the details we like. And I will get into, not some details, but I will get into some sort of big- picture issues here. But I want to make it clear that to change course, to change the nature of our tourism in Berm uda where for decades and decades we have had Tourism Ministers whose political careers are inextr icably linked to how well they did in tourism arrivals or how well they promoted Bermuda, where you had that really integrated link between a business, an industry, a sector of business which is an industry, and the p olitical discourse. Of course, while everything was working nobody thought it was a problem. But I congratulated the Honourable Member who just spoke before me on at least his description of what had been going wrong in tourism in terms of the rise of competition. How we basically started with an indus try and nobody else had it and eventually the competition caught up. It is a combination of things. Competition caught up and we thought that no matter what nonsense we did in this country, you know, we could have general strikes, we could make people take their bags to the airport across the causeway, you know, we could inconvenience them all over the place —no matter what we did we thought they would still come. But now we know that is not true because they have choices. Because tourism is a business, first and foremost, and we are in a business. We are in a competitive business and if you do not do your homework as a business and you do not sharpen your pencil and you do not get your service right, then your competitors are going to eat your lunch. And, Mr. Speaker, they have eaten our lunch. They have eaten our breakfast and they have eaten half of our dinner. There is not much left. Maybe the only thing left for us right now is a midnight snack, but I can tell you that is the essence of the problem. So the question here, Mr. Speaker, as I see it, is not whether or not you like the Tourism Authority, not some of the questions that have been put forward here. The essential question is, Can we as a tourism destination ever be competitive again? That is the question. Now, my honourable friend who just took his seat kind of implied that we cannot ever be compet itive again. I do not believe that. And I think that this party does not believe that. That is why we are going through all the trouble of bringing this Tourism A uthority here, because we think there is still something that we have that we can offer our customers across the seas —something good. I will tell you—I am sure that everybody in this room has the same experience as me when you come from New York , Washington, the UK. It does not matter, you are on a plane and you come beneath the clouds and you look down and you see Bermuda down here and you say, My God, what a beautiful place! I bet that happens to everybody in this room and everybody who is listening to me. You look down and you say, My God, this is a beautiful place! So we still have that. We have to figure out how to make that work as a business. My honourable friend who just took his seat, Mr. Burt, wheeled out his four Ps of marketing. He really took me back a long way with that one, but I would say that the one thing that was omitted, in add ition to the four Ps, was the most important issue— it is the one V and that is for “value.” It is not that Bermuda is expensive. There are plenty of expensive places on this Earth where tourists flock to all the time. I have constantly given this example, and I will give it again. In one of my favourite islands, Barbados, a place I go to often, they have a hotel there called Sandy Lane. You cannot get a room there for under $1,000 a night, but you would have to book three years in advance to get that room because it is so popular. It is not the price, Mr. Speaker. It is what you get for the price— the value for money. My honourable colleague, Mr. Simons, has it right.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberHe did? House of Assembly 2210 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, he got it right. If you are paying a five- star price and you get three- star se rvice, you are going to go out of business pretty quic kly. You know …
He did?
House of Assembly 2210 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, he got it right. If you are paying a five- star price and you get three- star se rvice, you are going to go out of business pretty quic kly. You know what, Mr. Speaker? The hotel bed capac ity in this country has declined by 50 per cent since the golden age of tourism —50 per cent! We have half the hotel beds now that we had 25 to 30 years ago. And in spite of that huge decline in capac ity, our annual occupancy rate still struggles to make 60 per cent a year. These are telling figures —telling figures about this industry where you cut down the capacity and you still cannot fill your hotels. I think the Honourable Mr. Furbert said it right. It is about seasonality. So we have to do something radical here. What we have had in tourism is called in economics an economic secular decline. We have had a secular decline in tourism. When we were on the road show for the bond issue in the summer, some of the investors asked about tourism, and when I told them that, you know, the bed count in Bermuda was down 50 per cent, they were just astonished. How do you even manage to have an industry that has declined by half? In most places if you are down 25 per cent, you are done. But we are down 50 per cent, so we have to do something radical here. Much rhetoric has been made today about saying that, you know, this Tourism Authority is not going to change anything, and if a Tourism Authority was the only thing we are going to do, the answer would be yes. The Tourism Authority by itself is not going to change anything. But the Tourism Authority as a first step to radically change the shape and the structure of this industry will change something, and that is why we are doing this. I must say, Mr. Speaker, that one of the things that I noticed about the debate here today, it kind of proves why we have to have a Tourism Authority, why we have to separate the business from the politics. Look at all the nonsense about things that were said here this afternoon. I mean, we had a personal attack on the most successful Bermudian tourism manager in the history of Bermuda! We had all kinds of person-al attacks on this gentleman and he has given of his time to be the Chairman of this Tourism Board and what does he get —he gets all kinds of nonsense in this place. He is only doing it for his country. If ever there was proof why we need to separate tourism from politics —that is it! It is this political sniping, this political back and forth across the aisle, scoring political poin ts that relates to a vital industry that has helped to hurt us in tourism. That is why even though it may seem simple; the formation of a Tourism Authority is in fact a radical step. It is a radical step. At least it is a radical step for us. It is a radic al step for us. You know, maybe in some other country it may not be a radical step, but in view of the tradition of having politicians integrally involved with tourism going back to the beginning of tourism —in view of that tradition, to make this step is a radical step and the debate that we have had here proves that that separ ation has to be made, because most of the debate here is going to result (as an old song said), it is going to signify nothing. The only thing that is going to signify som ething here is when we pass this Bill to form this Tourism Authority, because all of the political sniping, all of the character assassination, does not help anything. It is those kinds of distractions, those kinds of non-business related motivations that distract at tention and dilute energy from the task at hand, which is to turn around a set of businesses that are on life support. We had earlier this year, and we have mentioned this many times in this place, a tourism development summit. First time it has ever been done. The essence of tourism in Bermuda is not cruise ships. Now, I love to have cruise ships here. The Gover nment makes money from cruise ships. And they spend some money in Bermuda. The essence of tourism in Bermuda is the hotel business. If we cannot have the hotel business in Bermuda —the aggregate of all the hotels —if they cannot be profitable in aggregate, then our tourism business is not sustainable, and our hotel business in aggregate has not been profitable for decades. You may have one hotel that has been profitable, one or two hotels that are profitable, but add them all together, the hotel industry has not been prof-itable. We have to figure out a way to make hotels profitable. We have to figure that out before we can get new hotels in Bermuda, because nobody is going to invest the money in a hotel in Bermuda if they do not expect it to be profitable. That is the essence of this. This Tourism Authority is not just going to be involved in marketing, as far as I understand. All right? They are going to be involved in some of these (what I call) fundamental economic issues. I do not know how many amateurs in this room, including me, are going to be able to bring anything really valuable to that particular equation. You have to get the people who are active in the industry, as someone said earlier, who actually have skin in the game. When you have skin in the game, it really does focus the mind. That is why this taking tourism out of the realm of politics and into the realm of solely the people who have something to lose makes all the difference. That is why it is not just ni pping around the edges. It is something that is a radical change, and we need that radical change. I am going to sit down in a few minutes, Mr. Speaker, but let me just look at my notes here.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Now, I just want to comment on this part. And I am glad the Member, Mr. Burt, is back because it was referring to the ability of House of Assembly
the Tourism Authority to make advances to busines ses in the tourism business. He asked the question, What happens when the investments go bad and is this some sort of black hole into which you pour mon-ey? (Or words to that effect.) Well, this is something that I am not intimately familiar with, all the aspects of this Bill, but I am intimately familiar with this part because we have a clause in there that says if the aggregate of all these investments and loans gets to be more than $1 mil-lion, then the Tourism Authority has to come to the Minister of Finance to get approval for a dollar more. So there is a check, Honourable Member. The check is me!
[Inaudible interjections and crosstalk]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It is me, and whoever comes after me. So, there are checks and balances as it relates to that. There was also a mention by the Honourable Member, he used the phrase very colourfully “corporate welfare.” That is an interesting term. I would not call the Tourism Authority corporate welfare because the Tourism Authority is a very kind of unique animal. What I would call corporate welfare is the concessions we give the entire hospitality industry. That is corpo-rate welfare. And if this Tourism Authority, plus all the other things that we are going to do that that Honour-able Minister of Tourism is going to bring to this House soon, when these things are successful, we will be able to reduce the corporate welfare that is hog-tying this Government right now for revenue.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWhoa! Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: That corporate welfare — those concessions that we are making so you can get tourists, to get hotels built, to keep hotels and restau-rants in business —that is corporate welfare, and we are doling that out all over the place. We are doling it …
Whoa!
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: That corporate welfare — those concessions that we are making so you can get tourists, to get hotels built, to keep hotels and restau-rants in business —that is corporate welfare, and we are doling that out all over the place. We are doling it out—the former Government was doling it out, too. So, yes, we are dealing with corporate welfare in Bermuda, but what this Tourism Authority represents is a step, a first step, to try to change that paradigm because we cannot do corporate welfare forever.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberAmen! Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: We cannot do that. So, you know, ultimately, we have to make a choice. We have to fix this thing so we can get rid of the corporate welfare, or we just kiss tourism goodbye and we just sort of stick with international business. …
Amen!
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: We cannot do that. So, you know, ultimately, we have to make a choice. We have to fix this thing so we can get rid of the corporate welfare, or we just kiss tourism goodbye and we just sort of stick with international business. I do not want to do that, Mr. Speaker. I do not want to do that. It would not be good for Bermuda. I was talking to the Premier a little earlier and we were talking about —we were looking at the stuff that is in the paper today about tourism, and none of it is good. You know, we brought to mind the phrase that is often used that we have an economy that rests on two pi llars. Mr. Speaker, that is nonsense! We do not have an economy that is resting on two pillars. We have an economy that is resting on one pillar and one stool. You know, you have one there and one there. You can hardly call that balanced. But that is our economy. One pillar and one stool, and it is a short stool. That is the reality. But let me end on this note, Mr. Speaker, that let us dispense with all of this political diatribe, talking about Bermudians, you know, Bermudians should get the job and all this sort of stuff. If we want this thing to run like a business, we want to get the right person in there. If we get the right person in there, we can help save the tourism industry and provide thousands of jobs for Bermudians. If you put a Bermudian in there and he is not the right guy, well, thousands more Bermudians are going to lose their jobs. This whole concentration about whether a person is Bermudian or not is a political discussion; it is a political discussion. That is the essence of what is wrong with tourism. We have oil and water here that we have been mixing for decades. The thing to do now is, we need to separate the oil from the water — we can keep the oil in here and we can talk all this political stuff and have fun. All right? But let the bus iness people go out and do the business and generate those jobs and take the rest of Bermuda off of corpo-rate welfare. Thank you.
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Hono urable Minister. The Chair will now recognise the Opposition Leader, the Member from Warwick South Central, constituency 26, Honourable Marc Bean. You have the floor. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Good evening, Mr. Speaker —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGood evening to you. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: —and to Honourable Members. I certainly would like to follow on from the last two previous speakers who have certainly set the tone for my remarks, and I would like to thank the Shadow Minister, David Burt, and the Minister of …
Good evening to you. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: —and to Honourable Members. I certainly would like to follow on from the last two previous speakers who have certainly set the tone for my remarks, and I would like to thank the Shadow Minister, David Burt, and the Minister of Finance, Bob Richards, for their comments. We can and some will claim that some of us tried to use this opportunity to blame one another. We can claim that the Authority that has been presented to us today is a carbon copy of the Tourism Board. We could have spent this entire debate pointing fin-gers at one another. Unlike international business, I think we all will agree that IB [international business] is a trickle -down sector. House of Assembly 2212 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Well, I mean, they say we do not agr ee, but do not interrupt me right now. Unlike IB, which is trickle down, in my mind, tourism represents the best sector by which Bermudians may make money and directly benefit from it. In other words, for instance a taxi driver when he turns off his key, he is paid. His cash, his payments are in his pocket. There is no trickle down associated with the taxi industry and their reliance on the tourism i ndustry. So with the pressing redundancies and unem-ployment that continues to rise, tourism in my opinion is the most logical way in which the people of this country can make an honest living. It is for that reason that I do not think now is the time to play political games at all. Not at all. So there is nothing intentional-ly that will come from my mind that wil l make this i ssue political. But, Mr. Speaker, we do have some structural problems. We do have some structural challenges and the TA, the Tourism Authority, is supposed to be the answer to those structural challenges. Shadow Minister Burt spoke of the history of how we lost our competitive advantage. It was backed up by the Mini ster of Finance. But let me just put it into perspective. In Bermuda’s context the tourism industry has always been an oligarch industry —an oligarch industry. Former Members of this House in yesteryear were also the owners of tourism -related businesses. That is the origin of Government subsidisation of this industry. It was the fact that the persons who controlled the public purse also ensured that the public purse was directed into their private purse. In modern times it is called “crony capitalism” or another term that can be used, already repeated, is corporate welfare. That is when you have business persons, or so- called bus iness persons, who rely on favours and political co nnecti ons in order to boost their business' bottom line at the expense, oftentimes, of the more efficient market participant. In other words, because you have a political connect you have an easier way to be successful, and at the same time the person who has taken the risk, is more efficient in delivering the service, will get blocked just because of your political connection. So, yes, ho-tel concessions is representative of corporate welfare, but I will show in my additional discussions that the Tourism Authority is the archetype of corporate wel-fare and crony capitalism as presented today, and that, to me, is concerning. Beyond anything else this is the fundamental structural challenge facing our industry today. The proposed Tourism Authority does nothing at all to change the structural challenge and in fact (in my opinion) it further entrenches these deficiencies. In my mind from what I see in here, regardless of what I have heard, the OBA are corporatists in their outlook. They are not capitalists. Well, a c orporatist is a person who practices corporate welfare.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: That is what the Minister of Finance . . . he said, What does that mean? I just gave him an explanation. [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Marc A. R. B ean: Corporate welfare is the pri ncipal, it is the system. Corporatist is the person parti cipating in it. I am not making it up. Wikipedia it, if you like. Mr. Speaker, the challenge in my opinion is this . . . because Minister Richards says that oil and water do not mix. Oil and water do not mix, and I total-ly agree with him. But in my mind, the Tourism Authority (TA) is the oil to our industry which is the water. It surely is and the reason why comes down to one fun-damental thing: taxpayer funding. If this Tourism A uthority Act was solely funded by the private sector, I would not even stand up. I am on record, Mr. Speaker, when I had heard the then- Opposition speak of a Tourism Authority, I said that I am all for it if it is fun ded by the private sector. But this is not funded by the private sector. This is funded by the taxpayer and that is the fundamental challenge. That is the relic of the past. That is the oligarchic system of yesterday — taxpayer money into private sector hands. I do not care how you paint it, it is what it is. So, Mr. Speaker, the Member of Parliament, Glen Smith, mentioned privatisation. Well . . . but this is not privatisation. So let us not confuse the public. Minister Crockwell mentioned the word “autonomy.” This is not a question of autonomy. This is a question of accountability, because it is taxpayer funded. Au-tonomy is just a smokescreen to make it seem that you are something that you are not. It is about ac-countability, Minister Crockwell. And then I heard Minister Gibbons claim that our hotels spent a lot of money on marketing. Well, let me make it clear, Mr. Speaker, when Government intervenes in the market, a hampered market destroys the incentive for players to innovate, to create, and to compete. It is hampered. So I think that the Minister spoke of the marketing budget or marketing activities of our local hotels. Now, I am not going to dispute whether or not they actually have high marketing expenditure. But my question is, Where is it? Where is the evidence? I have cable. I get the local channels, Miami channel 10, New York channel 12 —I get all the chan nels from the Eastern Seaboard right up to Canada. I see Breezes; I see Atlantis; I see Butch Stewart Sa ndals; I see Beaches —I have yet to see one property in Bermuda on any of these key mediums in our key markets. So where is the evidence of the private sec tor House of Assembly
having skin in this game? Or are they overly reliant on the taxpayer to fund a key component of any bus iness’s business model. I would like to see the evidence. I do not care if you say you spent $2 million. I do not see it. That is the real evidence of whether you have skin in the game. We are not competitive in this country in our industry because either we refuse or we are prevent-ed from competing. We refuse to compete or we are prevented from competing. So, what is the way for-ward in my mind? Well, it is not the Tourism Authority. But what is the way forward? That is why I asked a few weeks ago for the Honourable Minister of Finance to clarify some statements, because I am trying to understand the Government's economic philosophy. He said, he has spoken, the Minister of F inance, that the Government is interested in deregul ation and I asked him to clarify it. Is it just for interna-tional business or is it for all sectors and the Minister said it is for all sectors inclusive of tourism. Then the Minister said today that, yes, maybe he was speaking for himself but he is all about the free market —I take it for face value. But, Mr. Speaker, the Tourism Author ity is not a ligned with free- market principles. It is not. It cannot be with taxpayer funding and a group of per-sons charged with planning tourism's future direction. It can be said that the Tourism Authority has more orientation to Marxist/Socialist thought than free-market thought. Do you know why, Mr. Speaker? [Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Yes, because the Board is of central planning organisation. Their responsibility is to figure it out. True? Yes, it is true. But central planning is the hallmark of that other orientation, that other relic of the past. It is a proven myth, and I do not care what degrees you have, what qualifications you have, and what you think about yourself, no group of men or women can sit in a room and do a better job than the market itself. I do not care who you are. You can get the best five people out of this Honourable House and they will not be able to do a better job in strengthening our tourism industry than the market itself. What is the market that I am speaking of? Well, we heard the product mix from Shadow Minister Burt. We heard it reinforced by the Minister of F inance. But the market to me (first and foremost) is the people of Bermuda. Us. We are the market. Bermuda is the place, then you have the price, then you have the product. Yes, that is the marketing mix. But our people are our primary product. You could have the most beautiful destination on Earth, you could have the most beautiful beaches, you can have everything in terms of a place, but without people you do not have anything. When you travel, it is the interaction with people in their various locales that sets the tone of that value experience. It is us. That is the people. So the ultimate value is derived from the people. So [in] our National Response on July 22 nd, we called on the people of Bermuda, especially those who are unemployed or facing potential redundancy, to prepare, to become creative and to compete in our tourism industry. In other words, do not complain—get out and hustle. And then I used examples. I used ex-amples so the people could relate to it of locals setting up a jerk pit, selling jerk chicken or T -shirts or braiding hair—targeting in the first instance the cruise ship passengers in the Dockyard area and hopefully one day in St. George's. I will tell you what, many persons . . . and from the bloggers I could tell who is aligned with whom. I saw many OBA supporters and bloggers, Mr. Speaker, at their suggestion, ridicule the suggestion and erroneously and typically compare that suggesti on to the vibrant competitors in the Caribbean—our vibrant competitors. In other words, Y ou cannot have a jerk pit; you are going to take us backwards. And, That is going to be ghetto. And that is going to be this and that. Well, you could go to the Bahamas, you could go to Barbados, you could go to Oistins and you will get a piece of flying fish and then you still could make it. You still could make it over to Sandy Lane. You could go to Atlantis or Paradise Island and still make it to Arawak Cay. In other words, it is not any cookiecutter approach, This is your place and this is what you have to accept . You cannot tell that to any person in the Caribbean. Okay? There are no laws in the Caribbean that can prevent Caribbean people from fully participating in the tourism industry. If there is money to be made, they are going to use their creativity to make it. That is all that we are saying in our address to the people of the country. Not ridiculing the OBA, but telling them that times have changed. Do not look to Government for handouts. Do not look to the politicians to be a sa lvation. The money is on Dockyard in US currency. Find a way to get it out of their pockets legally. Hustle! Whatever the people want —present it and provide it. Then maybe during the weaker, slower months in wi nter you have enough accumulated that could get you through—$1 is better than no dollars at all. That is the bottom line. Mr. Speaker, just used an example, but let me add some more examples because it speaks to the structural challenge that we face and it is not a polit ical issue at all. But what about a tiki bar on our var ious beaches? [Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Well, I said “tiki” bar.
[Laughter] Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: No, I did not say that.
House of Assembly 2214 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
[Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI understood you clearly, Honourable Member. [Laughter] Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Oh man! But you see the r esponse. Just —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou got everybody's attention! Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Because it is a natural human response. Right, because tourism is leisure. It is about having fun. So I cannot see why our tourists could come on our beautiful beaches and they cannot get a cold beer —or two, or three, …
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberOr 14! Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: We are the only country in the world that prevents people from having a cold one on the beach. It is unbelievable. How about a nightclub so we could change the laws to allow nightclubs to open to five or six in the …
Or 14!
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: We are the only country in the world that prevents people from having a cold one on the beach. It is unbelievable. How about a nightclub so we could change the laws to allow nightclubs to open to five or six in the morning? If you do not want to be at the nightclub that long, go home. If you do not like nightclubs, do not come out! But people want to have a good time. We have to expand the working hours —24/7— if we are in the business of making money. We have to be open 24/7. Are you a hustler or are you not? We also . . . and someone says, Why did you not do that for 14 years? This is not a political back and forth discussion! No one cares about what ha ppened the last 14 years or the last 30 years. We are still in the same spot. Our people, our people, are suffering.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSpea k to the Chair. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Our people are suffering. This is not political. I would like to see a tiki bar. I would like to see people to be able to buy a cold one on the beach. In fact, some people —let me read …
Spea k to the Chair.
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Our people are suffering. This is not political. I would like to see a tiki bar. I would like to see people to be able to buy a cold one on the beach. In fact, some people —let me read the Royal Gazette . Okay, let me get this clear —some people would even go as far to say we need gentleman's clubs. We need gaming. We need coffee shops. That is what . . . if you go on the Facebook, that is what people are clamour-ing for because that is what the market desires right now. As far as I am concerned, we need to free up. Basically when people feel free they spend money. You go [to] Vegas, you spend money. You go [to] South Beach, you spend money. Money actually runs out of your pocket when you are in an environment that is free. Okay? But in Bermuda money seems to have Velcro on it, it does not move! [Laughter]
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: If you have it, it does not move! We have Velcro pockets because the place is not free. It is too stuck up and stupid —not unparli amentary language, Mr. Speaker, but, you know —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWe will let you off on that one. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: We are too stiff -necked in this country! This is not a political . . . I am not pointing fingers saying the OBA is stiff -necked or the PLP. We in this count ry are hypocritically …
We will let you off on that one.
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: We are too stiff -necked in this country! This is not a political . . . I am not pointing fingers saying the OBA is stiff -necked or the PLP. We in this count ry are hypocritically stiff -necked. Lord knows what happens when we get on the plane. We raise the price everywhere we go.
[Laughter] Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: It is the truth! It is the truth! In my mind, if tourism is leisure then if you want to play, all you have to do is pay. Whatever you want, we could get that for you. That is the value proposition. If you want to play, then just pay, partner, and you are good to go. Mr. Speaker, what are the impediments stopping this freeing up of our tourism indus try? Well, first, it is us, collectively —the Government. It is us, collectively, the Government. We are the impediment. For instance, let me use an example if someone from Somerset wants to set up a jerk pit coming out of Dockyard to sell jerk chicken and probably a little roast fish, it is the Parks Department that is going to tell him no, you know. No, you cannot do this. No, you cannot do that. And then you might have someone who wants to erect a store or something and it would be Planning that says, No, you cannot do this. No, you cannot do that . And then you combine the NGO and it is like BEST, who from a tourism perspective, are the worst thing that happened to our industry.
Some Hon. Members Some Hon. MembersNo! [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Now, listen because reme mber we could have had a bar, a cold one down War-wick Long Bay. It was BEST that said, No, you are going to destroy the trees and the sand—
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberAnd the birds. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: —and the birds . But now we all understand that Belcario Thomas is an example of the entrepreneurial vision and creativity that our country needs right now. [Desk thumping] House of Assembly Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Times have changed. So BEST …
And the birds.
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: —and the birds . But now we all understand that Belcario Thomas is an example of the entrepreneurial vision and creativity that our country needs right now.
[Desk thumping]
House of Assembly
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Times have changed. So BEST and others will vociferously fight against any tourism initiative. So I will ask BEST to consider what role they play in ensuring that they are not anti - economic in outlook. Our people need to have the opportunity. Mr. Speaker, mentioning that the biggest i mpediment is Government requires joined- up Gover nment. It is going to require the Tourism Minister can insure that the Minister of Parks gets his people on board, so when they have something going through, Parks is not saying, no, on one hand and tourism is saying, yes, on the other. It requires coordination and I am sure you are working on it, but it does. Minister Bob Richards loves to say, Government needs to get out of the way . Well, let us remove those impediments. Let us go a step further and r emove the taxes on our customers —reduce the taxes. Let us reduce the taxes on entrepreneurs seeking to get into the industry. Give them better or greater access. Yes, we might lose some revenue but, like you said, we have given enough hotel concessions away. We might lose a little over the short term but look at the gain as a result of more productivity over the long term. We have to give in order to receive, and Government has to lead by example. We as politicians need to lead by example. We need to remove these barriers to our customers and our entrepreneurs. We need a free market put into practise and not just in theory. We need it in practise. We need to free up and get out [of] the way. Tourism and conservatism do not work today in the modern world. Tourism and Government intervention does not work today in the modern world. Unfortunately, the Tourism Authority as pr esented today, while it will not take us a step bac kwards —I cannot think of us going any further bac kwards —it would not take us forward either. In fact, what it will do is make the industry the proverbial caged guinea pig running forever but going nowhere. Mr. Speaker, we must free up.
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Minister — since there no other Member going to speak, the Mi nister will wrap up. Minis ter, you are wrapping up. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I know this has been a long, robust debate.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAbsolutely. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: I can tell you that I had to hold back some of my Members who still wanted to contribute to this debate because as various Members have articulated, this issue is of national importance. As the Honourable Finance Minister stated, right now the industry is …
Absolutely. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: I can tell you that I had to hold back some of my Members who still wanted to contribute to this debate because as various Members have articulated, this issue is of national importance. As the Honourable Finance Minister stated, right now the industry is on the verge of extinction. I think that we all need to sit up and appreciate that we have to turn this around. I agree with the Finance Mi nister that we can. When you have world travellers, like Lisa Leslie who came here to speak at the Women's Summit on Sports —first time she has ever been to Bermuda. She came because the desired speaker (who was Laila Ali) could not make it. They are good friends, and she called and she said, Can you pinch hit for me? and she came down and she was blown away. She said, This is the best kept secret! She said, I am bringing my friends. We are coming back for our annual trip because I have never seen an i sland as beautiful as this! Magnificent! She kept talking on and on about how wonderful it is —a woman that has travelled the world. I can recall at the Bacardi International—I am trying to think of . . . Jacklin. Tony Jacklin came down. He was the guest golfer at the Bacardi International. This man has won major, major tournaments —I b elieve the British Open, and I believe he has won other matches as well. I am sure the Deputy Premier can help me on that, but he has won major champion-ships. He was the first Ryder Cup captain of Europe to win the Ryder Cup. This man has been all over the world —won the British as well. When he came here for the first time last year (or earlier this year) he made the same comment. In fact, the mayor wants to be a part of the promotion of Bermuda because he was shocked. He said this is the best island nation he has ever been to and enjoyed playing at the Turtle [Hill] at Fairmount Southampton. So if world travellers, Mr. Speaker, who have been all around the world can come here and say this is the best, then clearly the product that we have should be successful in tourism. We do not have to compete with Asia. We do not have to compete with these other regions, the Pacific region. The numbers that we need to keep Bermuda successful are not that much greater. We have to increase tourism by a cou-ple hundred thousand. We are not talking millions. If we can get over 400,000 air visitors to Bermuda, the industry will do well. So we can get there and we have heard a litany of speakers today and let me say that I am grateful for the tenor. I had dialogue with the Shadow Minister prior to the debate, because we speak and we are friends. And I said that my brief was not going to be about a pportioning blame, because there is plenty to go around. I do not believe that there has been any administration or any Tourism Minister that has not tried and really wanted to turn the industry around. But as the Shadow Finance Minister said, We need a massive change of paradigm. We all agree with that statement. And we on this side of the House believe House of Assembly 2216 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
that that change in paradigm starts today because we are doing something fundamentally different than how we have done the management of tourism before. The Honourable Opposition Leader was tal king about joined- up Government. I agree 100 per cent. In fact, we have presented the National Tourism Plan—the Chairman of the Board and the designate Chairman of the Tourism Authority and colleagues — presented the National Tourism Plan to the Cabinet and explained to Cabinet Ministers that it is not just about the Ministry of Tourism, that there is a role for the Ministry of Environment, there is a role for Public Works, there is a role for Public Safety —all of these Ministries and so forth . . . there is a role for Immigr ation. The first stop that a tourist has is when they come through the airport. First stop. There is a role for the Department of Immigration. We all have to buy into the National Tourism Plan and everybody has to fulfil their role. Then they went on and took the same National Tourism Plan which was presented by the Honourable Wayne Furbert when he was the Minister, and as everyone said on the 29 th of June of 2012 we all ratified it in this House. It was taken to the Permanent Secretaries and I understand (I was not allowed to attend because that was the Permanent Secretaries meeting) and the pr esenters, I was told it was a fantastic presentation. Everyone is now coming to the realisation that we have to work together to make this thing work. I agree with the Opposition Leader. We have to free up so that our guests can have a good time. My father is a long- time Seventh Day Adventist, was head elder of Southampton Seventh Day Adventist Church all my life. He does not support gaming because of his rel igious conviction.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you. [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIsn’t that great? That is the kind of collaboration we need. That is the kind of working t ogether we need. Yes, absolutely. [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMake sure it is water now. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Hope they did not spike my water, Mr. Speaker! [Laughter] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Be wary of gifts! We were having a conversation a few months ago, and I was expecting his position to be as ardent as it always …
Make sure it is water now. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Hope they did not spike my water, Mr. Speaker!
[Laughter]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Be wary of gifts! We were having a conversation a few months ago, and I was expecting his position to be as ardent as it always is with gaming. And he did present his position from his religious conviction and did not think it was the right thing to do. I said to him, Daddy, you are talking about creating product or creating tourism policy based on what you want. But when we are tal king about creating tourism policy, we have to create policy based on what our guests want. If you are invi ting somebody into your house to eat your food, you cannot just make food that you want to eat. You have to figure out what they are going to enjoy so that they can come and enjoy the meal. So we are inviting our guests to come to Bermuda we need to think, What do they want? If they want the option to game, then they should have the ability to exercise that option. If they want the option to have a cold one on the beach, then they need to have the opportunity to exercise that option. The list goes on and on. Mr. Speaker, there were some things that were raised, some criticisms and some questions that were raised during the debate and I will try to address the ones I think require addressing. First of all, a few Members talked about half a million dollars spent on this Act. First of all, that is not the case. The monies that have been spent was not just on the production of this Act, but let me say that the work that was put into producing this Act specifically from the consultants, Ernst & Young, they provided substantial qualitative, research data on the Governance model. I believe that there were many individuals in the industry that were interviewed to find out what can best serve Bermuda's purpose. So a lot of work was put into the governance model, comparative analysis with other jurisdictions, and what will best accommodate Bermuda, and also a great deal of those funds have gone into the very complex transitional stage. I will tell you and I believe that the Chairman—I would like to acknowledge that the Chairman, the Honourable David Dodwell, is in the Chamber and I am grateful for him being here—I agree with the Finance Minister, I believe that there were some attacks on the other side and there were not many, I believe that most speakers try to keep this constructive. But some of the attacks on the Honourable David Dodwell were reprehensible because I can tell you right now . . . and, yes he is a personal friend of mine. And, yes, he is a political colleague of mine. I have no problem with that. Maxwell Burgess was the Chairman of the Tourism Board and we know that he is a personal friend of the former Minister Wayne Furbert. We know where his membership lies politica lly. So let us not get into that. The reality, Mr. Speaker, is that I have never seen an individual —and I have no problem saying this—work as hard as the Honourable David Dodwell. I get e- mails at 11:30 at night and I wake up to e- mails and he is doing this free of charge because he loves this country. And if anyone wants to question the e nergy, the commitment that David Dodwell has given House of Assembly
this country in tourism then somet hing is wrong. Something is wrong. The fact of the matter is the Honourable Wayne Furbert appointed David Dodwell to the Tourism Board for the very reason why I have made him the Chairman. So I find it reprehensible that someone would get up here and impugn the integrity of this Chairman. Now, Mr. Speaker, yes, we have spent some money on this because we felt that we had to get it right. And if I am involved in something, I am going to be as thorough as I can. I have heard things like, Oh, well, they spent $500,000. Mr. Speaker, with all due respect —and I do not want to get into any big fight — but there have been some major expenditures in tourism. The Honourable former Tourism Minister spent over $200,000 for the Bermuda Magic Show and it was not successfu l.
[Laughter] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. Point of order.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, what is your point of order? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: We had a very good debate today. [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, right. That is his point of order — that is has been a good debate. Let us keep it a good debate. Thank you, Honourable Member. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: I am going to keep it that way, Mr. Speaker, but let me . . . we have to …
Yes, right. That is his point of order — that is has been a good debate. Let us keep it a good debate. Thank you, Honourable Member.
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: I am going to keep it that way, Mr. Speaker, but let me . . . we have to put these things in perspective. That Honourable Member got up and was talking about half a million dollars, others have talked about half a million dollars as if there has been some wastage— what I am saying is I know that over $200,000 was invested in an initiative that was not successful. We know that. There was supposed to be a whole summer of shows and we only had two for over $200,000 investment. We all know in this House that a former Tourism Minister spent $1 million for one performer. Now, we are going to talk about money in here when the former Tourism Minister, Dr. Brown, paid Beyoncé $1 million for one concert? And the Honourable Members on that side will come here and talk about half a million dollars to change the par adigm of tourism!
[Desk thumping] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: That is ridiculous, Mr. Speaker!
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou have made your point, Honourable Member. [Laughter] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Now, there have been comments about this Bill being no different than the Tourism Board Act. Mr. Speaker, I have heard some Members get up and say it is different. Some say we have given too much power. …
You have made your point, Honourable Member. [Laughter] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Now, there have been comments about this Bill being no different than the Tourism Board Act. Mr. Speaker, I have heard some Members get up and say it is different. Some say we have given too much power. Some say it is just a name change. I am not quite sure if the Honourable Members in the Opposition appreciate the differences. I articulated in my brief 10 major differences, and they were not all of the differences. They were the salient differences. There are significant differences with this legislation and the Tourism Board Act. What this particular legislation provides is that this entity will be managed in an independent way. Yes. Are we taking a risk? Absolutely. Have I had some challenges in the quietude of my time thinking about, you know, what we are b ecoming laissez -faire—we are letting go, we have no control. Yes, that is part of this transition. We are putting a great deal of faith in the individuals who will be running the Tourism Authority. There will be risk; but we believe that it is the risk that we have to take because how we have managed tour-ism . . . people are talking about while we are giving this entity, the Tourism Authority, approximately $30 million. Do you know that $30 million . . . this is the smallest budget tourism has had in a very long time. The budget of tourism has decreased by 40 per cent in the last five years. It was in the middle— like $45 [million] or $48 million. So it has been reduced. It is still a large number, but we have been spending a lot of money on tourism and we have not been getting the returns. So, yes, we are going to continue to invest in the tourism product because we know if we just said to the Tourism Authority go out there and try and fund yourselves right off the bat . . . it would fail. It would fail. They will not be able to raise sufficient revenue to be able to do what they are supposed to do, and we are not going to let the Tourism Authority start off in that precarious situation. So, yes, we will fund it. People have asked the question, Well how would it become self -funding? We have some initi atives on the table to achieve that and when (at the appropriate time) we can bring it forward. But there are some opportunities for significant revenue that can be raised for the Tourism Authority. Ultimately, it is our objective that the Authority be self -financing, but as it stands today, for the prudent management of the A uthority, it must be funded primarily by the Government. We have heard a lot about the CEO and that the CEO must be a Bermudian. I have said before that we will be seeking the best person for this position. I do not have any problems with that statement. It makes no sense spending the half a million dollars. It House of Assembly 2218 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
makes no sense going through all of what we are g oing through right now and then we are not going to seek the best person to drive the Authority. In fact, I am hoping that we find someone who has turned a tourist destination around already. I would love to see a résum é where the person says, I went to this destination and it was in trouble and un-der my tenure we turned it around. I want to see that. We have been looking for the best person. And if that best person is a Bermudian, then that is even more fantastic. If it is not a Bermudian, are we going to be looking for a Bermudian to succeed? Absolutely, but the first CEO is going to be the best person for the job and the second CEO we hope to be even better than that. But, Mr. Speaker, all this stuff about Bermudian and, you know, David Hill was not a Bermudian. And under the PLP Government he was appointed CEO of the hospital making more than $500,000 a year. Donald Thomas was not a Bermudian and he was Chief of Staff making a very healthy salary at the Bermuda Hospitals Board. The BMA [Bermuda Monetary Authority] Chairman is not a Bermudian and he makes a healthy salary. The first commissioner of the Board of Educ ation—the first commissioner of Education under the PLP Government —was not a Bermudian, Mr. Henry Johnson. We heard someone get up and extol the success of GlobalHue in 2008. Well, I do not think Glob-alHue is Bermudian. Mr. Speaker, the Director of Tourism, who I enjoy working with, is not Bermudian. He was em-ployed under the PLP Government. The Director of Overseas Operations in New York is not a Bermudian and she was employed by the PLP Government. So what is the PLP talking about? This is r idiculous. It is hypocritical whenever we come here and we hear all these criticisms from the PLP when they did the exact same thing and more. Now all of a sudden we cannot do it. In fact, Mr. Speaker, if they want to talk about redundancies, let us look at what happened to the New York office of the Department of Tourism. Not too long ago —talk about redundancies —they lost their jobs! We have made a pledge and we will keep the pledge that not one employee that is currently em-ployed in the Department of Tourism will lose their job. They will not be unemployed. So, Mr. Speaker, let us just be honest in this discussion. I think with all due respect that that is a very laudable commitment of this Government. Very laudable. And as I said earlier, there is a great deal of excellent and [there are] outstanding employees in the Department of Tourism. I am sure many of us enjoyed Cup Match down in St. George's this year. I can tell you . . . you had employees from the Department of Tourism working tirelessly taking care of our tourists that were down at Cup Match, and then they were down at Horseshoe Beach working tirelessly all day down there to make sure that they were taking care of those that were there, and marketing Bermuda. They did it for two days on the holiday! That is commitment. That is the type of commitment we are going to need going forward. So I believe that a great deal of the employees that are currently employed by the D epartment of Tourism will end up in the Tourism A uthority. Why [do] I believe that? Because they are the experts, they have years of experience. They know what they are doing. We do not want to lose that. But at the same time we have to have a fair process and, what is that fair process? Everyone applies. Everyone would apply and everyone would have an opportunity to be able to go to the Tourism Authority and those who do not —because the reality is the Tourism Authority, the staff, will be less than what we have today. I do not have the exact number because we are still working on the organisational chart and job descriptions, but it will be less bec ause we cannot just wholesale take the operation that we have now over to the Tourism Authority and hope that it is going to function more efficiently. We have to streamline. We have to be more agile and so naturally there is going to be a reduction. But we have made a commitment that those individuals will not be unem-ployed and they will remain whole. They will not lose their benefits and that is a commitment that this Go vernment will keep. Mr. Speaker, another issue that may have been raised is the composition of the Board. I heard the Honourable and Learned Member, Kim Wilson, talk about the fact that we should have the president of the BIU [Bermuda Industrial Union] as a legislated or statutory member. And I am anticipating maybe that is going to be one of the . . . I have not seen any of the amendments that I hear may be proposed, but that may be one of them. We certainly wrestled with this as it relates to ex officio members and mandated members within the Act. But based on our research we know that, number one, we have to reduce the size of the Board so it can function effectively. We have to. Best practice is five or six for a corporate structure. We have eight. The Honourable Member said that the Board operated under 16. But then if you add the ex officio members, who I can tell you mostly were present at Board meetings —they show up because they have an interest to represent. They show up. Now, we respect that interest and we will . . . the Act allows for various committees to be created. We understand the value of all of the stakeholders whether it be the BIU, whether it be the Chamber of Commerce or whether it be the Bermuda Hotel Association. We will have them i nvolved. But if we want to be more efficient and more agile, we had to streamline the size of the Board. So, House of Assembly
we have done that and we are not prepared to reco nsider. When people are talking about whether or not this particular idea will be the game changer or will be the first step in significant change in the industry . . . we have heard from individuals on the other side who do not necessarily agree with that. But those who we consider to be the stakeholders have been in full agreement with what we are doing today. We have heard it. The Bermuda Hotel Association came out in full support of the type of Authority we are creating. The Chamber of Commerce came out in full support. Two former PLP Tourism Ministers came out in full support. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: I am sorry. I heard interpolation from the Honourable Independent Member. I should say three former Tourism Ministers! [Laughter] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: And add the Honourable Wayne Furbert to that list, because he was not a part of my first two.
[Laughter] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: So you are right. Thank you, Honourable Member. It is actually three. The other two are Renee Webb and Dr. Ewart Brown. Dr. Ewart Brown personally contacted me and supported what we are doing here today. I think that . . . and look, we do not know. T oday we are all prognosticators as to what is going to happen in the future as it relates to the Tourism A uthority. Some say it is not going to make a difference and we say it is going to be a game changer. We do not know what the future holds but what we do know is that for 30 years, Mr. Speaker —since 1983— our tourism industry has been going the wrong way. You know, I wear the hat of Transport and Tourism and we had a period in June where we had a plane divert to Bermuda and we could not find one hotel room to accommodate the individuals on the plane because all the hotel rooms were full. But the very next day, knowing that our hotel rooms were full, the very next day we had a plane come to this country 50 per cent occupied. How in the world can we have all of our hotels full but our airlines coming half em pty? That tells me that we have a serious problem (and the Finance Minister highlighted that) of capacity in this country. If you have one hotel in the Bahamas — one hotel —with more hotel beds than we have in this entire country, how can we compete? One of the main objectives of this Gover nment is that we have to bring in new hotel develo pment. I have to say, Mr. Speaker, I am very encour-aged by some of the conversations that we are hav-ing. There are some exciting things in the pipe line and, you know, I believe last week (or earlier this week) Fairmount Hamilton broke ground on their new marina project. They bought the property less than a year ago. In a year's time —and this is something that the Economic Development Committee should be proud of, because in less than a year, or just about on a year, they have been able to start a major develop-ment. They were able to start a major development project. Yes, the former Administration had a hand in it. Of course they did. But with the Economic Deve lopment Committee streamlining the process of ap-proval to breaking ground, that is something that demonstrates both the former Administration and this Administration recognises the importance of hotel de-velopment, foreign investment. I believe i n this first term of the OBA Government we are going to see multiple new developments in this country as it relates to hotels. So it is not just the Tourism Authority. No, it is not. But I stand and say with great confidence that the formation, the statutory creation, of a Tourism Author ity today is the right step and it is the first step in the right direction. Yes, we need more hotel development. Yes, we need to make sure that our existing hotels upgrade their product. Yes, we need to create new product and yes, we need to free up, Mr. Speaker. We need to do all those things. But today is the start, I hope, for a new chapter in our tourism development. I would like to thank all Honourable Members for their contributions and, Mr. Speaker, I would like to now move that the Bill go into Committee.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. It has been moved that the Bill be now deba ted in Committee. Are there any objections? There are none. I would like to ask that the Deputy Speaker, Mrs. Roberts -Holsh ouser, take the Chair [of Commi ttee]. [Pause] House in Committee at 8:16 pm …
Thank you, Honourable Member. It has been moved that the Bill be now deba ted in Committee. Are there any objections? There are none. I would like to ask that the Deputy Speaker, Mrs. Roberts -Holsh ouser, take the Chair [of Commi ttee]. [Pause]
House in Committee at 8:16 pm
[Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Chairman]
COMMITTEE ON BILL
BERMUDA TOURISM AUTHORITY ACT 2013
The ChairmanChairmanHonourable Members, we are now in Committee of the whole [House] for further consider ation of the Bill entitled Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013 . I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister, you have the floor. House of Assembly 2220 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report Hon. …
Honourable Members, we are now in Committee of the whole [House] for further consider ation of the Bill entitled Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013 . I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister, you have the floor.
House of Assembly 2220 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. I would like to move the first five clauses. My intention, Madam Chairman, is to move them in five clause tranches. Madam Chairman, do you need approval that we move the first five?
The ChairmanChairmanNo, please proceed. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you. Madam Chairman, this Bill establishes the Bermuda Tourism Authority which has the principal objective of efficiently developing the tourism industr y and promoting Bermuda as a tourism destination so as to increase the contribution of the tourism industry for purposes of …
No, please proceed. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you. Madam Chairman, this Bill establishes the Bermuda Tourism Authority which has the principal objective of efficiently developing the tourism industr y and promoting Bermuda as a tourism destination so as to increase the contribution of the tourism industry for purposes of the economic development of Berm uda. The Authority achieves its objectives under the Bill by formulating strategies and programmes and effectively managing outcomes necessary to enhance the travel and tourism sector's contribution to the Bermuda economy, and generally, by doing all such matters and things as may be incidental to or cons equential upon the exercise of its powers or the discharge of its duties under this Bill. Clause 1 provides a citation for the Bill. Clause 2 provides for the definition of terms used in the Bill. Clause 3 establishes the Bermuda Tourism Authority as a body corporate. Clause 4 provides for the composition of the Board. The Board will comprise of eight members i ncluding the Chairman. The members of the Board, other than the Chairman, appointed immediately after the commencement of this Act shall be appointed by the Minister in consultation with the Chairman and shall be appointed for the periods set out in clause 28. A member of the Board other than a member appoin ted to the Board immediately after the commencement of this Act, shall be elected by the Board after the Board has consulted the Minister and be appointed for a period of four years. Clause 5 provides for the appointment of the Chairman of the Board by the Minister. The Chairman is appointed to hold office for such period not exceed-ing three years as the Minister may determine and his appoint ment may be renewed. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 1 through 5? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Tourism, Honourable Wayne Furbert. You have the floor. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, I have not much to say on these particular clauses 1 …
Thank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 1 through 5? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Tourism, Honourable Wayne Furbert. You have the floor. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, I have not much to say on these particular clauses 1 through 5. Like I said, there is not much difference between the appointment of the Chairman that was in 2012 to what is here. The only real difference is that the Board is elected by the Board Members themselves in co nsultation with the Minister. That is a major difference. But remember that the . . . and we will get part [of it] at the very end because the initial Board is appointed by the Minister. So those same Ministers, those same Board Members who are appointed by the Minister at the very beginning have the right to elect new Board Members, but they also have the right to continue in serving, if I am right on that one. But in clause 4, I am going to ask him one question. “[(4)] A Member of the Board shall have suitable qualifications and experience . . .” and I just wanted to ask the Minister how does he define suit able qualifications and experience in regard to this par-ticular . . . in other words, would t he BIU president be a suitable qualifying person?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 [through] 5? Thank you, the Chair recognises Mr. T. E. Lister, Sandys South, constituency 33. You have the flo or. Hon. Terry E. Lister: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would just like the Minister to …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 [through] 5? Thank you, the Chair recognises Mr. T. E. Lister, Sandys South, constituency 33. You have the flo or. Hon. Terry E. Lister: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would just like the Minister to explain for me the difference between clause 4(2)(b) and [4](2)(c). In [4](2)(b) —this is where the Members are being appointed to the Board. In [4](2)(b) the person can be selected by either the Minister or the Chairman and in [4](2)(c) the person is appointed by the Minister. Yet the reasons giving rise to the need to appoint som eone appear to be exactly the same. I do not really understand why [4](2)(b) and [4](2)(c) exist, and I would appreciate it if the Minister could explain that for us. Additionally, clause 4(7) says, “The Chairman and members of the Board shall be paid such fees and allowances as the Minister may determine.” Now, we have had a lot of talk about money here today. Hopefully this is not like the million dollars for B eyoncé, but we would like to get an idea of what the Members of the Board will receive— what number the Minister has in mind for the Members of the Board and for the Chairman. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 [through] 5? There are no other Members. Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Madam Chairman. House of Assembly To address the first speaker, the Honourable Wayne Furbert, first of all, the Members of the …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 [through] 5? There are no other Members. Minister?
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Madam Chairman. House of Assembly
To address the first speaker, the Honourable Wayne Furbert, first of all, the Members of the Board are only eligible to be reappointed once. So after that, that is it. So, if a Member is on the Board . . . and r emember that there is a rotating Board. So if a Member is . . . let us just take the first two, the Member is on the Board for two years and they are reappointed once, then a maximum would be six years for that Member. After that a new Member would have to come, and then because of the rotation of the Board there will always be an influx of new Members coming in at different times and the Board will never lose all of its Members at one time. In relation to suitable qualifications and exp erience, I think it is prudent to read out the entire clause "shall have suitable qualifications and experience to enable meaningful contribution for the effective and efficient realisation of the objectives of this Act." So that means that the person could . . . there might be a need for legal services, an attorney; there might be need for accounting expertise, there might be need for labour expertise, so, yes, absolutely the president of the BIU would qualify in the event that that is one of the needs for the Board. Now the Independent Member, the Honour able Terry Lister, asked questions about 4(2)(b) and [4(2)](c). The y are worded similarly, but what is most important, the difference in [4(2)](c) is anticipating the potential of the Board being inquorate. So the biggest part is to form a quorum. And you may know, Honourable Member (I was trying to find my notes), but I know that an Education Board at one point resigned en masse. And we do not want to have a situation where if the Board decides to just resign in its entirety then there is no one who is able to come in and r eplace those Members. So this allows the Ministe r in that extraordinary situation to be able to come in, or if it happened by incapacity or resignation or death all at the same time and the Board ended up being inquorate, then the Minister would be able to step in and remedy that situation. Madam Chairman, I would like to move on and now — [Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: I am sorry —yes, we, and this is the same clause that came out of the 2012 Act. A lot of debate went on about this. We are hoping to not only . . . we would like to be able to a ttract Board Members potentially that are not in this jurisdiction. It would be great if we could have a Board Member from another jurisdiction that can be able to assist in the marketing and promotion and bring ex-pertise to the Board as well. In order for us to attract the best, I think that we need to have the ability to at least pay for costs, maybe travel costs and the like, and even consider the payment of Board fees. That is something that is not going to happen immediately, and it is som ething for which we have not determined a figure, but the reason why we have drafted it this way is that we do not want the Board to be able to set that figure them-selves. We feel that it is essential that the Minister is aware because we do not want this to become a si tuation where Board Members are receiving a signif icant remuneration.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members who would like to speak to 1 through 5? Thank you, Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes, would the Minister —
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Honourable Wayne Furbert. You have the floor. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, I was trying to move ahead quicker. Would the Minister then agree that the appointment of the Board Members is [done] the same [way] as the appointment was [done] in 2012— the appointment …
The Chair recognises the Honourable Wayne Furbert. You have the floor. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, I was trying to move ahead quicker. Would the Minister then agree that the appointment of the Board Members is [done] the same [way] as the appointment was [done] in 2012— the appointment of the Board Members? I am not talking about numbers. That the Minister appoints the Board Members as similar to 2012. Thank you.
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, I would agree that the initial appointment is . . . that the Minister will be making the initial appointment. What is drastically different is that going forward the Board will then have the power to appoint its Members —going forward. So that is the major distinction. In relation to section 28, the initial appointment, yes, that is going to be the Minister's respons ibility as is the Government setting up this entity.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you. So, if you are picking the Board Members —I think it is two, three and f our years, the initial Board Members —that is quite a long time. And those Board Members can then reappoint themselves for another two, three …
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, we are going ahead of ourselves. We are actually talking about the content of clause 28. But it is two, three and four —that is correct—and yes, the Board will be able to reappoint those Members. Again, keep in mind that whenever a Board …
Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, we are going ahead of ourselves. We are actually talking about the content of clause 28. But it is two, three and four —that is correct—and yes, the Board will be able to reappoint those Members. Again, keep in mind that whenever a Board Member is eligible for reappointment or there is a v acancy that is coming up the Minister can nominate House of Assembly 2222 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
someone else, and the Chairman can also nominate someone else. But that person can present themselves again.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I guess the bottom line, Madam Chairman, is there is not much drastic dif ference between the appointment of the Board Mem-bers, and basically the Chairman and the Minister have basic control over those Board Members for at least two, four, six and now eight years.
The ChairmanChairmanMember, could you wait for me to at least recognise you before you start to speak? Thank you. Was that a further question, Member? Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. There is the opportunity for the first appointment of the Board to be on the Board …
Member, could you wait for me to at least recognise you before you start to speak? Thank you. Was that a further question, Member? Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. There is the opportunity for the first appointment of the Board to be on the Board for the next six - plus years. But I do not see the appointment of the Board the same as controlling the Board. The Board would be appointed and the Board will be able to get on with its business. So if the Minister thinks appointing is controlling— I take a different view —but, yes, we thought it was important that the Minister have the authority to appoint the first Board.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members that would . . . the Chair recognises Honourable Member Furbert. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Then I am sorry if I said “control” because the control part is within the function and the power of the Board, but the Minister then must agree that the …
Are there any other Members that would . . . the Chair recognises Honourable Member Furbert.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Then I am sorry if I said “control” because the control part is within the function and the power of the Board, but the Minister then must agree that the appointment of the Board Members is similar to appointment of the Board Members of the 2012 Act.
[Inaudible interjection]
The ChairmanChairmanThat has been agreed. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 [through] 5? For expediencies sake, we will go through the segments of the clauses but we will not pass them until we get to the conclusion, if that is agreeable to everyone. In …
That has been agreed. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 [through] 5? For expediencies sake, we will go through the segments of the clauses but we will not pass them until we get to the conclusion, if that is agreeable to everyone. In that particular case, Minister, you have the floor.
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, for expediency, I would now ask to move the next 10 — some are saying they want me to do more, some are saying less. So I will just do the next 10 clauses so we can try and expedite this. Clause 6 provides for the appointment of the Chief Executive Officer by the Board after consultation with the Minister. The Chief Executive Officer is to be responsible to the Board for the proper administr ation and management of the functions and affairs of the Authority in accordance with the policy laid down by the Board. Clause 7 provides for the appointment of agents, promoters and contractors. The Authority is empowered to employ such agents, promoters and contractors as may be necessary for the purposes of the Bill. Clause 8 provides for declaration of interest in affairs of the Authority by persons seeking emplo yment with the Authority. A person seeking emplo yment as an officer or employee of the Authority who has, directly or indirectly, by himself or with his bus iness or other partner, entered into any contract with, for or on behalf of, the Authority shall declare the contractual interest they have with the Authority in such a manner as the Board may determine in the rules. An officer or employee who fails to disclose interest of a contractual nature in the Authority is liable, in the dis-cretion of the Board, to summary dismissal without notice. Clause 9 provides for the appointment of committees consisting of members of the Board or other persons. The clause also provides for the del egation of powers of the Board to the Chairman, any member of the Board, the Chief Executive Officer, the committees of the Board or any officer or employee of the Board. The power of the Board to delegate its powers is not to include the delegation of the power to delegate. Clause 10 provides for immunity from suit for any officer, employee or agent of the Board, members of the Board and the Minister, with respect to any act done bona fide in pursuance or execution or intended execution of their functions under this Bill or regul ations made thereunder. Clause 11 provides for the principal objectives of the Authority. The primary objective of the Authority is to develop and promote Bermuda as a tourist dest ination. Clause 12 provides for the powers of the A uthority. The Authority shall have power to do anything for the purpose of discharging its objectives under this Act or any other written law, or which is incidental or conducive to the discharge of those objectives. Clause 13 requires the Minister to cause an interest register to be compiled and maintained. The Minister and each member of the Board shall file in the interest register written notices of any interes t that they may have in the business conducted by the Au-thority as soon as it is reasonably practicable. Mem-bers of the public may inspect the register upon pa yment of $5.00 or such fee as may be prescribed. Clause 14 provides for the funds of the A uthority. The funds of the Authority are to consist of House of Assembly
sums appropriated by the Legislature for the purposes of the Authority and all monies including dividends, royalties, interest, income received, fees, payments and commissions for services rendered, grants and moneys borrowed. Clause 15 provides for the renaming of the Tourism Guest Fee as the Tourism Authority Fee and provides for the payment of the tourism authority fee by each proprietor of a hotel in respect of each guest accommodated in the hotel. The tourism authority fee is to be at the rate of 2.5 per cent of the rack rate charge made by a hotel in respect of any guest. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 6 [through] 15? The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Tourism. You have the floor. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Let us look at clause 6. I am not sure why the CEO, …
Thank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 6 [through] 15? The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Tourism. You have the floor. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Let us look at clause 6. I am not sure why the CEO, suitable qualification has to be for travel and tourism sectors. It is our view that a CEO does not need to be all -knowing in this particular department. And I understand finance and management, but why does that individual have to have travel, and tourism [experience], [which] now limits the list. As I have said before, if all of a sudden Bill Gates shows up and says, I would like to be the CEO, I am sure we would all like to take him. But he does not have travel and tourism sector experience. He has travel —he may — but not the whole part about that particular industry. I guess my concern is you are limiting, now, your scope on the individual who can actually be the CEO. If you look around the Island based on this you are being limited down to a very few people, if any. There are top CEOs around the Island. Why could they not be the CEO and, you know, that person has to have travel [experience]. I do not understand that. I understand it but I do not understand why it has to be there. It really does not open up the opportunity for a top Bermudian who may be overseas working for, you know, Citibank or whatever, who says, Look, I am g oing to go back to Bermuda. I understand the product. I know where Shelly Bay is and Beanie’s Bay and I know about Horseshoe Bay, but I may not have travel and tourism sector experience. I do not know why that has to be there.
[Inaudible interjection]
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Is that your question? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: No. I heard the Honourable Member say that is what the job is about. But there are many individuals who . . . CEOs do not necessarily have to know it all. They will have individuals in their . …
Thank you, Member. Is that your question?
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: No. I heard the Honourable Member say that is what the job is about. But there are many individuals who . . . CEOs do not necessarily have to know it all. They will have individuals in their . . . you have the Chairman who knows it all, who is the travel and tour-ism sector and, as the Honourable Member, Grant Gibbons, said, he is the one that has the expertise in this. He can understand the travel and tourism aspect. So I am just saying that I do not see any need for that individual for that. So, you want me to go through all the rest of them, correct? Other sections?
The ChairmanChairmanFrom 6 through 15. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: From 6 thr ough 15. The appointment of the CEO, again, is other than is appointed after consultation with the Minister. Matter of fact, the ad here is the longest ad I have e ver seen for any CEO in Bermuda. So …
From 6 through 15.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: From 6 thr ough 15. The appointment of the CEO, again, is other than is appointed after consultation with the Minister. Matter of fact, the ad here is the longest ad I have e ver seen for any CEO in Bermuda. So the Members . . . I hope you have time to read it, but it really limits a Bermudian. That is why I said [they should] at the very bottom put Bermudians need not apply because it does not meet . . . talk to—
The ChairmanChairmanSo Member, your question is? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: There is no question. I am making a s tatement.
The ChairmanChairmanWe are looking for questions. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: You are looking for questions?
The ChairmanChairmanYes, please. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I do not have to make any question.
The ChairmanChairmanFair enough. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Oh, okay.
The ChairmanChairmanI was just looking for the question. I thought you had a question on it so I just wanted clar ification. I wanted to make sure I did not miss anything. [Inaudible interjections and laughter] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, I wi ll not be deterred by that remark.
The ChairmanChairmanPlease do not. Please do not. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: But let me just say, Madam Chairman, that is one of my biggest concerns. And basically the CEO, again, as far as its appointment, it House of Assembly 2224 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report is no different from the …
Please do not. Please do not. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: But let me just say, Madam Chairman, that is one of my biggest concerns. And basically the CEO, again, as far as its appointment, it House of Assembly 2224 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
is no different from the appointment as on the 2012 Act. The Board shall, after consultation with the Mini ster, appoint this Chief Executive Officer. No difference other than the person needs travel and tourism sector [experience]. Appointment of agents —I have no problem with that. Declaration of interests by job seekers —if any of my honourable colleagues want to speak to that they can. Appointment of committees and delegation of powers —I have no problem with that. I am on [clause] 9. The immunity from suits —again, this was a copy and paste from the 2012 Act. [Clause] 11—copy and paste from the 2012 Act. [Clause] 12 —power of authority, a copy and paste other than the parts that says on 12(2)(a), (e), (f), (g), (h), and (i) in particular. These are the ones that we have grave concerns about. These particular items to acquire, take on lease —this is 12(2)(a) —to acquire, take on lease, hire, hold and enjoy movable and immovable property and to convey, on and on and on and also [12(2)(e)] to subscribe for or acquire any stock, share, bond, debenture . . . or [12(2)(f)] to invest any money of the Authority in any business within or outside Bermuda . . . [12(2)(g)] to enter into any joint venture with any person or to form . . . these particular powers will not (from my perspective) bring in tourism. But what it does do, it allows the Gover nment because they are giving out probably [$]29[million] and the budget may be higher —they can go up to $30 million or even more.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: They are giving the Board, this Authority, significant funds, and yet the Minister cannot say that we do not want the Board to invest in Starbucks ™ or we do not want the Board to invest in whatever or we do not want you to mention tourism enterprise outside. Why should the taxpayer through the Ministry, through the Government, through the Minister, to the Board, give up all this funding but yet have no accountability to the people who are giving up the funding for it.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Because these particular items . . . and this is the only significant difference that we talk about in the Bill; the only significant difference between 2012 and 2013. I do not care what anyone says on that side, but this is the only significant difference. And the part about the interest . . . I understand the interest part. So, you know, you can talk as much as you want about that you have created something. That is why we are concerned about the half million dollars. You copied and pasted what was there for 2012, deleted the first part and then say it is significant. That is not significant at all. So, my concern (speaking on behalf of the taxpayers) is why do you not at least have some con-trol over the Board making decisions with the taxpa yers’ money to acquire taking on lease, hold, to subscribe or for or acquire any stock —any stock —share, bond, debenture ? I am surprised the Minister of F inance would allow this to happen. There is no control at all. So they can take that $29 million [and] take $15 million and invest it. They can. And then you understand why, at the end of the day you say, Well, what happened to the money ? We just bought some shares at McDonald’s ®.
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: There has to be some concern. And I do not understand why, in particular. I hope the Minister can get up and explain why these particular items have to be taken out with the Minister, through the Cabinet, having no sort of controls. It is not making any particular sense as far as accountabi lity is concerned. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: None of these particular items . . . I understand if you told me that [this] was going to generate some tourists tomorrow, they are going to come here by the dozens, because we bought some stock in Chrysler ® or whatever. If that was going to happen, you have my support. But it does not produce numbers. Bed nights are not going to go up. The airlines are not going to get full because of you buying stock. But what it does allow, it allows the Minister through Cabinet to control what the Board is doing on that particular item. So what is the logical reason? I want the Minister to really stand up and tell the country the logical reason and do not tell me of any signif icant difference. Tell me the logical reason of giving up that power and authority and rights to the Board.
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Because they do hold them to certain power under [clause] [12](b) to grant loans. But why would you allow the Board to grant loans and do whatever they want in that part? Just allow them to give it up.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: If you allowing . . . what are you getting upset for, Attorney General? If you are allowing the Board to buy shares and stocks, w hy do House of Assembly
you not allow them to give out loans? What is the difference? You are still going to get a return, hopefully. But the Minister does hold on to them to borrow mon-ey. Just give everything up. Give it up.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furber t: I just, I really do not understand the logic of that, and I hope the Minister or someone can justify the logic part of it. Interest of register —understand that. I dis agree with the $5.00. Why $5.00?
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I mean, anyone can look at the Register of Interests up here in Parliament of ours for free. I am surprised the Honourable Trevor Moniz supported that. I am sure he . . . just make it free.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Why should I pay $ 5.00 to see whether or what interests they have? [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: [Clause [14], Madam Chai rman, copy and paste. [Clause] 15—copy and paste. Do we go up to [clause] 16?
The ChairmanChairmanNo, that is [clauses] 6 [through] 15 . Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Right. So, from [clauses] 6 through 15, the majority of those parts are copy and paste, other than the parts where the Minister —and it was copy and paste too—just deleted where the Mi nister has control. So …
No, that is [clauses] 6 [through] 15 . Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Right. So, from [clauses] 6 through 15, the majority of those parts are copy and paste, other than the parts where the Minister —and it was copy and paste too—just deleted where the Mi nister has control. So we are now up to 15 [clauses] and the m ajority of the parts are copied and pasted from the 2012 Act.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Workforce Development. You have the floor.
Mr. Rolfe Commission gThank you, Madam Chai rman. I am trying to get some clarification from the Minister under the heading of Chief Executive Officer 6(3). It says here, “The Chief Executive Officer shall be responsible for the management of the staff of the Authority, and shall make determinations on hiring, promoting, disciplining …
Thank you, Madam Chai rman. I am trying to get some clarification from the Minister under the heading of Chief Executive Officer 6(3). It says here, “The Chief Executive Officer shall be responsible for the management of the staff of the Authority, and shall make determinations on hiring, promoting, disciplining and dismissing staff after con-sultation with the Board.” With respect to the hiring provisions that are going to be delegated to the Chief Executive Officer, is it the intention that the Chief Executive Officer will be making those initial hires that will include individ uals that have been made redundant in the department (or will shortly be made redundant)? Will it be his brief to make those hires, Minister? And, if so, what is the timeline for having the Chief Executive Officer in place?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. No further questions? The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Education. You have the floor.
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Madam Chairman. Just a quick question for the Minister under [clause] 6. Can the Minister tell this House whether or not he intends to issue a directive either to the Board or to the Chief Executive Officer with regard to the establishment of performance measures to assess the …
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Health and Seniors. You have the floor.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThank you Madam Chai rman. I would like [to ask] the Minister in reference to clause 6(3) with regard to the CEO, when it comes to discipline is it the intent of the Minister to have the persons that fill the new positions, will they be members of the unions? …
Thank you Madam Chai rman. I would like [to ask] the Minister in reference to clause 6(3) with regard to the CEO, when it comes to discipline is it the intent of the Minister to have the persons that fill the new positions, will they be members of the unions? And if he is going to be respons ible for the disciplining, will that be in consultat ion with the unions as per any of the collective bargaining agreement or any other union agreements?
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaI also have one other, and I mentioned this earlier when we debated. It is with reference to clause 13 and the interest register. As I said then, and I will certainly reiterate now, I hope the Mi nister is going to be a little bit more stringent with these …
I also have one other, and I mentioned this earlier when we debated. It is with reference to clause 13 and the interest register. As I said then, and I will certainly reiterate now, I hope the Mi nister is going to be a little bit more stringent with these declarations —certainly a little bit more stringent than what happened at the last election when they ha d Members on that side of the House that did not de-clare their interests but are sitting in here in this House tonight.
The ChairmanChairmanThat was a little too — POINT OF ORDER [Imputing improper motives] House of Assembly 2226 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Yes, point of order, Madam Chairman. That Member should retract that. That was imputing improper motives and he knows it.
The ChairmanChairmanWould the Member consider sticking to the legislation and the discussions? Would you consider?
The ChairmanChairmanWould we like to hear . . . I actually would like to hear a retraction of the statement per-taining to anything other than the Bill in front of us.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaMadam Chairman, I wi ll gladly retract it if the Members on the other side would tell me that that is not so. [Inaudible interjections]
The ChairmanChairmanThat has nothing to do with the legislation or what we are looking at. We will proceed. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses — [Inaudible interjections]
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? Thank you. The Chair recognises Mr. T. E. Lister from Sandys South, constituency 33. You have the fl oor. Hon. Terry E. Lister: Thank you Madam Chairman. Back to clause 6, it talks about the …
Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? Thank you. The Chair recognises Mr. T. E. Lister from Sandys South, constituency 33. You have the fl oor.
Hon. Terry E. Lister: Thank you Madam Chairman. Back to clause 6, it talks about the Chief E xecutive Officer. And I have to confess that I was a bit surprised earlier in the week when I saw the ad in the newspaper, first reaction. My second reaction was to say, Good thing, given that we are doing what we are doing tonight and given the fact that the staff are b eing dismissed (if I can use that term) very soon on. So we actually need to get this person in place fairly quickly so we can move to the next stage. There has been a lot of talk over the last few years about family and friends programmes and this new Government inherited the same tag. So naturally we will be concerned, especially when we hear that potentially the Chief Executive Officer could be a fam ily or friend. However, if you will allow me, in looking at the advert in the paper under minimum qualifications, number two, it says that it should be non- political and may not have a financial or operational interest in Bermuda's tourism value c hain. I am pleased to see that because the family or friend member that was being bandied about is a for-mer Senator, former Chairman of the last party and all that sort of thing. And this I believe disqualifies the person. So if that is the case where they have been saying they will look abroad and try and get the best person, or in Bermuda, I applaud the Government for that and the Minister, and I hope that he will not di sappoint himself and us by inviting a family member who clearly does not qualify based on that advert. I would like to move on to clause 12[(2)](f). Madam Chairman, I really do not understand the need for all of the subclauses in 12. The principal business of the Authority is to bring business to Bermuda. That is what it is for. It is to get tourists here; it is not to make a profit. Obviously, it has to pay its way, but to actually say we are going to go . . . for instance it might be very profitable to operate a minibus service. But if I were to learn a year from now that the Tourism Authority was running a minibus service I would be very disappointed. That is not bringing in tourists to Bermuda. It may be very profitable but it is cutting the throat of existing operators. It is just not something I would like to see. Under [12(2)](f) it says that we can “invest any money of the Authority in any business within or outside Bermuda which will promote or be conducive to the tourism trade in Bermuda.” Now, here is one of the problems with doing that. Let us say there is a marketing firm and promotional firm that the Authority really liked, really had a lot of confidence in and was of a certain size and making a dollar investment in it could boost that firm and then get it to be a bigger firm, a better firm, and could do more for Bermuda. Good move in year one or year two. But suppose by year four, two other firms have come along and are better, faster, smarter, do-ing good things and you say, My gracious! I would actually like to have one of them being our people. But I own this other company. Hmmm, not going to want to sell out too quick and they are not going to want you to sell the shares. So now you have to scratch your head and say, Well, maybe we will just keep our shares in Company A, but we will hire Company B to represent us because they are now better . You see where I am going with this? It is nonsensical. I would suggest to the Minister that this sort of clause be looked at very closely. In fact, all of 12 be looked at and the decision made as to which clauses of 12 really are necessary, because I think this is tr ying to create something akin to a corporate entity and saying, Well, if you were going to run a business, duh, duh, duh, duh, we would have all these subclauses . Yes, you would. But that is not our objective. And moving in the way that I just gave as an example works against the Authority and the people of Berm uda rather than working for them. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? House of Assembly Thank you. The Chair recognises the Oppos ition Leader. You have the floor. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. [Clause] 6, Chief Executive Officer, (2)(d). It …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? House of Assembly
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Oppos ition Leader. You have the floor.
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. [Clause] 6, Chief Executive Officer, (2)(d). It says that this Chief Executive Office would “report to the Board and be present during such parts of each board meeting that the Chairman deems to be appr opriate.” Now, from my understanding the CEO whet her it is in a private sector enterprise, a public body, or a quasi -public body is always on the Board of Directors. Now, the Honourable Member, Grant Gibbons, is saying not always. But would it not make sense. Is that not best practice to have your CEO also function as your managing director, meaning that they sit on the Board? Now, I am looking at this and it says that dependent on the Chair he would be able to call in—like technical officers are called in in the Gover nment —he could be called in to a meeting, the CEO come in, give his explanation, now remove yourself . Where is the continuity? I am raising it because I think it would be be tter if the CEO was actually a Member of the Board also, but function more so as a managing director. So the Chairman is on one end of the table and the CEO is on the other end of the table, very similar to the General Manager of WEDCO sitting in on all board meetings for WEDCO and all the time. The Chairman does not say, Come in, give me a brief, and then leave. It is about coordination. I do not understand. If the CEO has so much responsibility especially in terms of hiring, promoting, disciplining staff and other things, setting strategy, applying it, [and] implementing it, why wouldn’t the CEO be a full -time Member of the Board? I think it makes much more sense from a good governance perspective, that is all. I would like for the Minister to consider that. Also, I w ould like to reiterate clause 12(2)(b) —
to grant loans or advances for anything that is under $1 million without the approval of the Minister of F inance. So generally you can say that $29 million, as an example, is set aside, and I can have 29 of the boys come around and I can divvy out a million dollars each to the boys —unaccounted for. Unaccounted for! But I can actually do that. If I want to offer a million dollars and a million and one dollars, I have to go to the Minister for approval.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThat’s an aggregate. [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: My apologies.
The ChairmanChairmanThat is okay. It was a fair enough question. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: It is fair enough.
The ChairmanChairmanIt can be answered when the Mini ster— [Inaudible in terjections] Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Otherwise . . . I mean, you are getting —
The ChairmanChairmanPlease, continue. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: — all excited, but then explain to me if this is about autonomy. [Clause] 14 says the funds of the Authority shall consist of those sums appropriated by this Legislature—this Legislature . You want to get all excited? This Legislature is going to …
Please, continue. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: — all excited, but then explain to me if this is about autonomy. [Clause] 14 says the funds of the Authority shall consist of those sums appropriated by this Legislature—this Legislature . You want to get all excited? This Legislature is going to fund it. Right? For the purposes of the Authority —yet we look at [clause 12(2)](e), (f), (g), and (h) —it is in clause 12—and there is not accountability whatsoever for the taxpayers’ funds that we in this Honourable Chamber will allocate to the Authority. There is no accountability whatsoever, and as the Honourable MP Lister pointed out, quite frankly, this is going to be the noose, historically, around the neck of the OBA. It puts paid to whatever they say ideologically, what this or what that. This is the proof of the pudding that you are allowing this Authority to be unaccounted and actually carry on almost like a state- owned enterprise where you can invest in an ything —the Board can actually go and invest in Cari bbean Airlines stock, or JetBlue stock or Delta stock. The Board can invest in Atlantis in the Bahamas.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: They can invest in any body, it says, who is involved in tourism. What is involvement in tourism? That is for them to define. It is such a grey area that is setting the scene or setting the tone for allegations of corruption and cronyism because there are no checks and balances . As the MP said, this is about promoting our tourism industry, not investing in stock outside of Bermuda. That is foolishness and that is something that I want on record. I am going to keep it with the OBA until such a time the OBA comes full circle. But do not ever tell me you are all into free market this and free market that. This is the evidence of cronyism at the highest level. There is no accountability. Then, to add salt into the wounds, we have an interest register. I guess that is supposed to com pensate for the obvious conflict of interest that will arise. It says in [clause 13](1), (2) and (3): the Minister or any Board member has any interest conducted by the A uthority, the Minister or member shall —the Minister or member?— file a written notice in the interest register House of Assembly 2228 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
as soon as possible after the Minister or member becomes aware that such business is being transacted. That still does not answer the major question about cronyism and a conflict of interest. But then, to rub it in even more, after using taxpayers’ funds, when the taxpayer wants to come and say, Well, let me make sure that my taxpayers’ funds are not being di vvied up amongst the boys . . . You mean to tell me I have got to pay $5.00 to find that out? It is my funds, my money. So yo u are going to make the public pay to find out whether or not you are doing some under -thetable foolishness with their money. It needs to be struck out, it needs to be amended, that clause right there. That fee, it is disrespectful to the taxpayers of this country. Okay? It is disrespectful. We will be bringing an amendment to strike out that $5.00 fee. Let that register be open to an yone. It is their money. At least let us have one little safeguard in this no- checks no -balance unaccountedfor piece of legislation. It is totally out of order, and I do not understand how the OBA could sit up here with a straight face and think it is cool that you can actually take taxpayers’ money and give your boys the power to divvy it up. Is that their MO? Is that the wa y they are going to approach Government? Because it has nothing to do with accountability and transparency, nothing at all, unless those words are not English.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Yes, it is shameful. It is abs olutely shameful. And I bet the media is not going to cover it. It is going to get a free pass, to the detriment of Bermuda.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Finance. You have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I just have a quick questions on section . . . If we are in clause 8, if we are on clause 8(1), where it speaks about “Any person who seeks employment as an officer or employee of the Authority who has, …
Mr. E. David Burt[Clause] 8(1). “Any person who seeks employment as an officer or employee of the Authority who has, directly or indirectly, by himself or with his business or other partner, entered into any contract with, for or on behalf of the Authority, shall make a declaration of such con-tract as a …
[Clause] 8(1). “Any person who seeks employment as an officer or employee of the Authority who has, directly or indirectly, by himself or with his business or other partner, entered into any contract with, for or on behalf of the Authority, shall make a declaration of such con-tract as a matter as the Board may determine in its rules.” And then, I guess the question I have is, does this apply to anyone who may have had a contract with the Department of Tourism, seeing you are going to hire a whole bunch of people who had the existing contracts with the Department of Tourism? There, I am not sure if this section covers that. I am sure there may be persons or individuals that may have con-tracts that, you know, may want to apply. I do not necessarily think this covers it because it only talks about people who have contracts under the Authority. I can understand that the transitional provisions assign contracts from the Board to the Authority. But I do not think there is anything that will assign contracts from the actual department to the Authority. So I am wondering if the Minister could clarify that. Moving on, Madam Chairman, to [clause] 14(a). This is the one that says, “The funds of the Authority shall consist of —(a) all such sums as may be appropriated by the Legislature for the purposes of the Authority.” I was hoping that, and I asked the Mi nister in the general debate, and I will ask the Minister now in the specifics. Surely, there must be an est imate on how much money is going to be asked of this House to allocate next year. There must be some type of es-timate on the amount of funds that is . . . If we went through this whole process and the Minister was very clear in saying that, you know, we had consult ants, and we laid out a plan, and this is the paradigm shift, and we have set and we have talked about the $500,000 that was used to come to this point, well, certainly in all the money that was spent, s urely they have a projection on how much money they are going to request next year. So I am going to ask the Minister if he would share that with us. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Health and Seniors. You have the f loor.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThank you, Madam Chai rman. Madam Chairman, I ask Members to go back to clause 6(1). “The Board shall, after consultation with the Minister, appoint a Chief Executive Officer.” My question to the Minister is, based on the comments made by his colleague, Mr. Cole Simons, earl ier tonight, has …
Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Madam Chairman, I ask Members to go back to clause 6(1). “The Board shall, after consultation with the Minister, appoint a Chief Executive Officer.” My question to the Minister is, based on the comments made by his colleague, Mr. Cole Simons, earl ier tonight, has [the decision for] this position of chief executive officer been made? Who is he? And will the Minister tell us who it is tonight? Second question, or comment . . . question. Moving on to clause 8(2). “Any officer or employee of the Authority who has entered into or acquires any such contract and did not make a declaration in terms of subsection (1), or who subsequently enters into or acquires any such contract as provided for in subsec-tion (1) but fails to disclose the contract entered into, House of Assembly
shall be liable, in the discretion of the Board, to summary dismissal without notice.” My question to the Minister is, In addition to dismissal without notice, if an individual has signed a contract of any value, let alone if it is a significant val-ue, is there anything in place that can take that from him because he got it in a position of authority? So in other words . . . I think the Minister understands what I am saying. Do I need to elaborate? No? Okay. Good. So that would be very good to find out. Because, you know, if I was on the Board and said, Well, look. I can get a contract worth $6 million, $7 million, $8 million. Cool. I got a conflict of interest. The only thing that can happen to me is I get dismissed from the Board. I am going to take that risk. Go ahead. Dismiss me from the Board! I still got my $8 million contract. So, what other things are in place other than automatic dismissal? Okay. And a simple, simple question, Madam Chairman, is with clause 13(3) with regard to the $5.00. Because I cannot figure out why there would be such . . . I mean, a $5.00 charge. What is the rea-son behind this $5.00 charge? What is the logic be-hind it?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister for Home Affairs. You now have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanInterested to have a question to the Minister in relation to clause 14, Funds of A uthority. [Inaudible interjection] [Gavel]
The ChairmanChairmanMember, would you like to sit, please? While I appreciate that there is a tendency of interpolation, I would request that, especially since the hour is getting late and we are only on the first Bi ll, in order for us to continue in a faster pace we control the …
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Madam Chairman. As I was saying, in relation to clause 14(d)(i) and 14(d)(ii), in relation to Tourism Authority fee and also as . . . Yes, the Tourism Authority fee. This did come up as discussion in the previous part of this de-bate on this Bill. But the …
Thank you, Madam Chairman. As I was saying, in relation to clause 14(d)(i) and 14(d)(ii), in relation to Tourism Authority fee and also as . . . Yes, the Tourism Authority fee. This did come up as discussion in the previous part of this de-bate on this Bill. But the Minister did not answer. Perhaps I can specifically address the question to the Minister on this, in that certainly there must be some projection as it relates to how much the Tourism Authority is going to raise on this fee over the next year or more since, as the Minister has already said, it is a goal for the actual Authority to be self - sufficien t after a period of time. Perhaps the Minister can reveal, having had the full day of debate, as to what is the projected re venue to be raised around that fee. And also in relation to [clause] 15, with the hotel and rate of 2.5 per cent of the rack rate charge made by each hotel in respect of guests, how much does the Minister perceive or project will be raised over the next two to three years with these fees applied? Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanYou are welcome. Are there any other Members? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Attorney General and Shadow Minister of Legal Affairs. You have the floor —in red.
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonThank you, Madam Chairman. One moment, please, Madam Chairman.
Mr. Zane J. S. De S ilvaMadam Chairman, when you mentioned the lady in red, she got all excited. [Laughter]
The ChairmanChairmanWe are discussing the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013. We are in Committee. Thank you. Member, you have the floor.
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonOkay. Tha nk you. Madam Chairman, I note that, particularly with respect to certain inherent safeguards, the things that would perhaps —
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonI am between [clauses] 6 and 15. I will not digress from that. But I notice that there are particular safeguards, so to speak, for want of a better word, in this legislation to give the members of House of Assembly 2230 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report the public …
I am between [clauses] 6 and 15. I will not digress from that. But I notice that there are particular safeguards, so to speak, for want of a better word, in this legislation to give the members of House of Assembly 2230 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
the public comfort in knowing the way that the Author ity will be run and managed and to provide a degree of accountability and so forth. When we look at [clause] 8 that deals specif ically, as we have heard, with the declaration of inter-ests by job seekers, and of course it provides that the failure to make such a declaration could result in summary dismissal. So I am sure that would be comforting to members of the public. And likewise, as we have heard already, [clause] 13 deals specifically with the interest, of the register. Now we have already heard some comments about the $5.00 fee, and I ac-tually also think that that is somewhat unnecessary, but needless to say. My question and my concern relate to [clause] 9 and [clause] 12. So we see in [clause] 9—
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonClause 9, which talks about the appointments of committees and delegations. And I am just going to paraphrase real quickly. The Board may, in its discretion, appoint among . . . blah -blahblah-blah- blah. And then it goes on to clause 9(2), “The Board may, subjective to subsection (3)” —and …
Clause 9, which talks about the appointments of committees and delegations. And I am just going to paraphrase real quickly. The Board may, in its discretion, appoint among . . . blah -blahblah-blah- blah. And then it goes on to clause 9(2), “The Board may, subjective to subsection (3)” —and that deals specifically with the committee appointed under that clause—“delegate to—(a) the Chairman; (b) [any of its] members; (c) the Chief Executive O fficer; (d) any committee . . .; or (d) any officer or an employee . . .” So, save for clause 9(3), that is the exclusion, “A committee appointed under this [Act] shall, in the performance of functions delegated by the Board un-der subsection (2), at all times be subject to such di-rections, conditions and restrictions as may be i mposed by the Board . . .” So in essence, what concerns me is that under clause 9, the Board, oblique Authority, has the power to delegate. They can delete some of their powers. But then yet, when we see, as was raised previously, under [clause] 12, Powers of Authority, 12(2)(a), “to acquire, take on lease, hire, hold,” shares land, et cetera, et cetera. And what is concerning, and I am hoping that the Honourable and Learned Minister will address this, is that we have in one [clause], in 12(2)(a) the Authority has the power to acquire land, buy stocks, surrender, charge, mortgage, everything. It does not say where the land is, so they could buy land literally in Timbuktu. No accountability, and we have heard that already. Previously, in certain pieces of legislation . . . and I ask the Minister, the Honourable Minister, if he can identify for me what other legislation exists in Bermuda that allows for an authority to buy, acquire, take lease, convey land of any kind, of any movable kind without any oversight of the Government that is elected?
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberUsing their money. Mrs. Kim N. Wilson: Using their money! So my concern is that, in addition to us not having proper checks and balances that say that the Minister, and then via the Minister, obviously, the Ca binet, must approve the acquisition of land, property, shares, et cetera, et …
Using their money. Mrs. Kim N. Wilson: Using their money! So my concern is that, in addition to us not having proper checks and balances that say that the Minister, and then via the Minister, obviously, the Ca binet, must approve the acquisition of land, property, shares, et cetera, et cetera, using the taxpayers’ do llars, so we have no oversight, but yet —and herein lies my question— when we look at [clause] 9, the Boar d can delegate that. So not only is it that the 16 or whatever me mber, however members are on the Authority can buy, share, acquire land without the approval of the Minis-ter, without the approval of the Cabinet, taxpayers’ dollars, they can delegate that power under [clause] 9. So, my concern, as I have indicated —and I am hoping the Minister can answer —is (a) what other legislation out there is so loosey -goosey, does not have any checks and balances when the money is being supplied by the taxpayers; and ( b) how is it that we have legislation that allows for a Board to buy, acquire land, et cetera— any land, so that could be an ywhere in the world— without Ministerial involvement or approval, without Cabinet approval, who has been elected by the people of this country, using the money of the people of the country? And they can delegate that power to anybody else to buy, sell, acquire land, et cetera, without any type of authority or accountabi lity by the elected people? That is my question. Thank you.
[Crosst alk]
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 [through] 15? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Honourable Attorney General. Mr. Mark J. Pettingill, you have the floor. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Sometimes, one wants to choke on …
Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 [through] 15? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Honourable Attorney General. Mr. Mark J. Pettingill, you have the floor. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Sometimes, one wants to choke on the level of hypocrisy when you hear comments about potential cronyism, and so on, when what we know is the shadow that hangs over that previous Government and continues to be investigated and hangs over them.
[Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaExcuse me. Point of order, point of order, Madam Chairman! Point of order. Point of order!
The ChairmanChairmanYour point of order? POINT OF ORDER [Imputing improper motives] House of Assembly
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThe Honourable Member needs to pull that statement back. Pull that back!
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Have a seat, please.
The ChairmanChairmanMember, I heard you. Thank you. Take your seat. Member? [Inaudible interjections and crosstalk] Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: I can assure you I am one of the people that is looking at the activities of the prev ious Government. So I am not recalling any statement. [Inaudible interjections]
The ChairmanChairmanMember, continue. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: We have already highlighted in this House some of those activities. There are more coming. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: The Honourable Member! Madam Chairman! Madam Chairman! Madam Chairman! Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: So, let me just say this, speaking the point. There will be …
Member, continue. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: We have already highlighted in this House some of those activities. There are more coming.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: The Honourable Member! Madam Chairman! Madam Chairman! Madam Chairman!
Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: So, let me just say this, speaking the point. There will be no withdrawal, no withdrawal.
[General uproar] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman! Madam Chairman! Madam Chairman! Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: No withdrawal. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman! Madam Chairman! Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: We will highlight —
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman! Point of order!
Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: We will highlight it. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Point of order! Point of order!
The ChairmanChairmanI cannot even hear. Thank you very much. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, you ca nnot keep— The Chairman: Thank you. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: You cannot allow this Member—
The ChairmanChairmanMember! Let me acknowledge you first, pl ease. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I thought you did, Madam.
The ChairmanChairmanNo. Thank you. But I recognise the Honourable Member, the Shadow Minister of Tourism. You now have the floor. POINT OF ORDER [Imputing improper motives] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank y ou. Madam Chairman, you cannot sit there and allow this Honourable Member to impute improper motives on the Members …
No. Thank you. But I recognise the Honourable Member, the Shadow Minister of Tourism. You now have the floor.
POINT OF ORDER [Imputing improper motives] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank y ou. Madam Chairman, you cannot sit there and allow this Honourable Member to impute improper motives on the Members on this side of the House. Bring facts into this House. Right?
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberBring it on! Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: And as he knows, he knows that . . . Yes, we love documents, too, Madam Chai rman. We love documents, too. So bring those, too.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Member? Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: Keep running the rope out. Keep running the rope out.
The ChairmanChairmanMinister. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: We have already seen some. But here we go. Just to these points, because I realise how they tend to come with respect to the House, is looking at the stuff as it goes. So, these are standard cor-porate clauses. And I appreciate that that …
Minister. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: We have already seen some. But here we go. Just to these points, because I realise how they tend to come with respect to the House, is looking at the stuff as it goes. So, these are standard cor-porate clauses. And I appreciate that that is why we are the Government dealing with business, because they do not necessarily get how that works. And we have seen a demonstration of that over a number of years. But they are speaking about clauses, with regar d to no checks and balances.
Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: P oint of order, Madam Chairman. Point of order.
[Inaudible interjections and crosstalk]
The ChairmanChairmanSit. Have a seat. Do have a seat. Thank you. House of Assembly 2232 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report The Chair recognises the Deputy Opposition Leader. You have the floor. It would be easier if I could even hear what he has to say. POINT OF ORDER Mr. Derrick …
Sit. Have a seat. Do have a seat. Thank you. House of Assembly 2232 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
The Chair recognises the Deputy Opposition Leader. You have the floor. It would be easier if I could even hear what he has to say.
POINT OF ORDER
Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes. Madam Chairman, you cannot continue to allow that Member to stand up here and make that argument. That is nonsense that he is talking about, about this party. He needs to stick to this Bill.
The ChairmanChairmanI agree. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: He thinks he has got some superior authority over this House. He needs to cut that nonsense out.
The ChairmanChairmanMember. Member. [Inaudible interjections]
The ChairmanChairmanI would ask that we stick to the Bill as neatly as we can. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: I take my friend’s point.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: I would be upset if I was them as well. [Laughter]
The ChairmanChairmanAh. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: Let me just say this. When you look at [clause] 12, let me help you out with this. These are standard corporate clauses in any type of standard corporate structure, including authorities. Those are just like le gal provisions that you will see in an …
Ah. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: Let me just say this. When you look at [clause] 12, let me help you out with this. These are standard corporate clauses in any type of standard corporate structure, including authorities. Those are just like le gal provisions that you will see in an authority, that you will see in corporate structures. So, when we talk about checks and balances, if you read ahead to like [clause] 20—
The ChairmanChairmanAh, but we are not there. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: No, but this is the whole point. Because so much time . . . This is the whole point. I realise we are not there. That is the problem. They are criticising sections saying, There are no checks and balances. …
Ah, but we are not there.
Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: No, but this is the whole point. Because so much time . . . This is the whole point. I realise we are not there. That is the problem. They are criticising sections saying, There are no checks and balances. And we hear the Leader of the Opposition interpolating. He loves to talk about cron yism and all this stuff. And he clearly has not read the sections to come. Because if he was to read them, he would know that all the checks and balances are contained in the sections that deal appropriately with the Financial Provisions. And it comes under Part 4, which follows this one. So, for all the listening public that is out there listening to all of, with respect, the nonsense that you heard on the criticisms of these sections, if they bot hered to read the next part and all of the standard pr ovisions that anybody would be able to accept would apply to an authority, they will see things with regard to annual reports, the tabling of such reports in the House and the accounts.
[Inaudible interjections]
The ChairmanChairmanMember. Member, I appreciate your input. But the Minister will get to that when we get to that clause. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: But, Madam Chairman, with respect, when you hear that type of comment coming out, some people are going to go to bed because they are going to …
Member. Member, I appreciate your input. But the Minister will get to that when we get to that clause.
Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: But, Madam Chairman, with respect, when you hear that type of comment coming out, some people are going to go to bed because they are going to carry this nonsense on deep into the night. So it is important they do not just hear that part, and know that there is more to come. If they bothered to read ahead, they would see that, too.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? [Inaudible interjections and crosstalk]
The ChairmanChairmanMember. Member. Thank you. The Chair recognises — [Crosstalk] [Gavel]
The ChairmanChairmanEnough! Thank you. We are to r espect each other as we do the people’s work. T hat goes on both sides! Thank you very much. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Finance. You have the floor. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 13
Mr. E. David BurtThank you very much, Madam Chairman. I do believe that the Whip has submitted an amendment to the table. And I would like to officially move that amendment. The amendment is the Amendment to the Bermuda Tourism [Authority] Act 1913, and it is mov-ing to amend clause 13, the interest …
Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. I do believe that the Whip has submitted an amendment to the table. And I would like to officially move that amendment. The amendment is the Amendment to the Bermuda Tourism [Authority] Act 1913, and it is mov-ing to amend clause 13, the interest register. And the amendment reads, “to delete the words from clause 13(3) ‘upon the payment of $5.00 or such other fee as may be prescribed.’”
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. We have in front of us . . . does everyone have their copies? House of Assembly
The ChairmanChairmanThen we are just going to wait for a few mi nutes while everyone gets their copies. We do have an amendment that has just been presented. It is an amendment to the Bermuda Tourism [Authority] Act 2013. [Pause]
The ChairmanChairmanDoes everyone have a copy of the amendment before them? Member, you have the floor. Would you like to elaborate?
Mr. E. David BurtWell, Madam Chairman, I think that we have heard the arguments on this side. We know that the register of interest, for instance, for the Members of the House of Assembly is published online. We k now that many people publish their registers of interest online. And I just think …
Well, Madam Chairman, I think that we have heard the arguments on this side. We know that the register of interest, for instance, for the Members of the House of Assembly is published online. We k now that many people publish their registers of interest online. And I just think that it does not make sense for, in a digital age, that we are going to attempt to charge people to look at something for things that could simply be put online.
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of clarification,
Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Minister? POINT OF CLARIFICATION Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, in r elation to this particular clause, and I will address all of the clauses raised by the Members in due course, this clause was inserted. It is a standard clause, particularly for corporate, statutory corporate bodies, as …
Thank you. Minister?
POINT OF CLARIFICATION Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, in r elation to this particular clause, and I will address all of the clauses raised by the Members in due course, this clause was inserted. It is a standard clause, particularly for corporate, statutory corporate bodies, as well as some authorities. But I hear the concerns of the other side. And we have no challenge accepting this amendment.
The Chairm an: Perfect. At this point, then, we will have at the conclusion, once we go through, we will then include the amendment. Up until that point, we are still discussing clauses 6 through 15. Are there any Members that would like to speak further to clauses 6 through 15? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Tourism. You have the floor.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, thank you. The Attorney General says that these are standard corporate clauses. Corporate corporations, this is not . . . This corporation is receiving funding from the Government; 95–98 per cent of the funding is coming from the Government. I can understand if it was a standard clause out there, a corporation which is not receiving . . . Three years’ time and they are fully funded by themselves, they can do whatever they want. But as far as them being held accountable for the public, you cannot have the Board giving the au-thority to another body to be able to go out and buy shares and everything else!
[Inaudible inter jection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes, but . . . and I have the right to say it again. I have the right to say it again.
The ChairmanChairmanYes, you do. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Okay? I have the right to say it again. I am just saying, responding to the Attorn ey General. If that is the information that we are receiving from the Attorney General, then he is getting the wrong advice and needs to change …
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to— [Inaudible int erjection]
The ChairmanChairmanI am actually speaking. Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? There are no other Members. Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, clause 6, I believe the Honourable Wayne Furbert raised the question that there …
I am actually speaking. Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? There are no other Members. Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, clause 6, I believe the Honourable Wayne Furbert raised the question that there was no difference with the CEO. And I do not know if we are going to go through this all night about the differences. Let me just say that there is no ques-tion that we did take sections from the Tourism Board Act. I said that in my brief. There was a good deal of the Tourism Board Act.
An Hon. Member An Hon. Member[It was] 90 per cent! Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: And if it is 90 per cent of it, I do not know why they are making so much noise. [Laughter] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: You know? If it is 90 per cent of the same thing, then they are criticising …
[It was] 90 per cent! Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: And if it is 90 per cent of it, I do not know why they are making so much noise. [Laughter]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: You know? If it is 90 per cent of the same thing, then they are criticising their own work. But, is my 10 per cent, is that controversial? Sorry? [Inaudible interjections]
House of Assembly 2234 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberHow much did you pay MJM? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: How much did you pay Trott & Duncan? [Laughter] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Exactly. Okay. Now, you know, it is interesting. They interp olated how much we paid MJM, Madam Chairman. This is the first time since I have been …
How much did you pay MJM?
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: How much did you pay Trott & Duncan? [Laughter]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Exactly. Okay. Now, you know, it is interesting. They interp olated how much we paid MJM, Madam Chairman. This is the first time since I have been in politics that I have heard any Government being questioned on, number one, who they hire for their legal work, or how much they pay for their legal work. We heard just a few weeks ago—
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Health and Seniors. You have the floor. POINT OF ORDER
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThe Honourable Member who just made that statement might need to retract it, because he was here. An d the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Derrick Burgess, will surely verify what I am about to say. When Julian Hall was hired by the PLP Government to be a consultant almost …
The Honourable Member who just made that statement might need to retract it, because he was here. An d the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Derrick Burgess, will surely verify what I am about to say. When Julian Hall was hired by the PLP Government to be a consultant almost everybody, to a man over on that side, complained about him. So, do not say that they have never questioned it, because they have! And they have a history of it!
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, the Honourable Member did not hear what I said. That was the hiring of a consultant . An Hon. Membe r: He is a lawyer! Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, he is a lawyer, but he was a consultant.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberStill a lawyer! Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Why don’t you listen to what I am trying to say? Okay? In my experience in politics, I have never heard an yone criticise the Government, the previous Government, for choosing the lawyer of their choice. The relationship between client and attorney is …
Still a lawyer!
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Why don’t you listen to what I am trying to say? Okay? In my experience in politics, I have never heard an yone criticise the Government, the previous Government, for choosing the lawyer of their choice. The relationship between client and attorney is a special relationship. You want to hire an attorney that you are comfortable with. The former Government hired Trott & Duncan, hired Attride- Stirling, hired Vi ctoria Pearman, hired Charles Richardson, hired Saul Froomkin. I have no problems with that. And hired Conyers Dill & Pearman. But the point is, when they hired Trott & Du ncan, no one complained that they should not hire Trott & Duncan. They were comfortable with Trott & Dun-can! I have no problem with them hiring Delroy Du ncan because he is a very astute attorney. And no one questioned how much they paid Trott & Duncan. And this is what the Honourable Attorney General was talking about, the hypocrisy! So they can hire the lawyers that they are comfortable with, but we cannot? If we are going to hire, we have got to put it out to tender? I never heard of putting out to tender legal advice! Have not heard of it. And I have never heard of anyone declaring how much they paid their lawyer.
Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Point of order. Point of order, Madam Chairman. [Inaudible interjections] Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: I am sorry. I am sorry.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Deputy O pposition Leader. You have the floor. POINT OF ORDER Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes. Madam Chairman, we are talking about the drafting of Government legi slation.
The ChairmanChairmanYes, we are. And I am glad you mentioned that. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Which is normally carried out by the Attorney General’s Chambers. This was not carried out by the Attorney Ge neral’s Chambers. And that is the difference. We have not hired anybody to do any drafting …
Yes, we are. And I am glad you mentioned that.
Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Which is normally carried out by the Attorney General’s Chambers. This was not carried out by the Attorney Ge neral’s Chambers. And that is the difference. We have not hired anybody to do any drafting for us. And this is where we call it a waste of money, because we have staff paid by Government to do this drafting.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Thank you, Member. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, I am not going to belabour this point because it is not part of the clauses. But outsourcing legal work, especially when you have a reduced drafting department, is not unusual. Now, Madam Chairman, the difference between —
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonPoint of clarification, Madam [Chairman]. House of Assembly
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Sha dow Attorney General and Shadow Minister of Legal Affairs. POINT OF CLARIFICATION
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonThank you, thank you. My point of clarification relates to the comment about limited staff within the drafting section of Chambers. I can confirm that the amount of drafters that exists at Chambers is the same as when the PLP Government were formally there and when I was the Attorney …
Thank you, thank you. My point of clarification relates to the comment about limited staff within the drafting section of Chambers. I can confirm that the amount of drafters that exists at Chambers is the same as when the PLP Government were formally there and when I was the Attorney General. So, for this comment to be speaking about the lack of drafters, I think is unfortunate and unfair for the hard work that the men and women do in the drafting section.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, the work that the drafters do is substantial. One drafter got sick, and I was upset that she got sick. That is how hard they work. They cannot even afford to get a day off for being sick. So, their …
Thank you, Member. Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, the work that the drafters do is substantial. One drafter got sick, and I was upset that she got sick. That is how hard they work. They cannot even afford to get a day off for being sick. So, their office has been overworked. And in this instance, we outsourced the drafting. Now —
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberNever! Never! [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, the debate is now deteriorating. And I think — [Inaudible interjections] [Pause] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, the difference with the appointment of the CEO under the Tourism Authority Act, number one, is that it is compulsory . Under …
Never! Never!
[Inaudible interjections]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, the debate is now deteriorating. And I think — [Inaudible interjections] [Pause]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, the difference with the appointment of the CEO under the Tourism Authority Act, number one, is that it is compulsory . Under the Tourism Board, it was permissive. And in this instance, it is with the consultation of the Minister rather than the approval. So, those are the substantial differences. There were quite a few Members —the Honourable Wayne Furbert, the Honourable Terry Lister, [and] the Opposition Leader —raised issues as it r elates to clause 12. And, Madam Chairman, the issue is, first of all, we have not gotten to [clause] 17. But [clause] 17 is going to help to explain the importance of clause 12, particularly under [clause 12](2). Now, our position as it relates to how this ent ity must operate is that it needs to operate like a cor-poration. We recognise that it will be receiving public funds. And this is the risk that is involved in this. But in order for the organisation to engage in commercial activities as it relates to tourism and discharging its functions under this Act, in order for it to be able to be swift, agile, get the job done, it has to be able to do that without having to seek the approval for every transaction it wants to do with the Government. Now, I have heard the Opposition Leader, I have heard others, the Shadow Attorney General, raise issues about the potential for cronyism and the like, and even raise the word “corruption.” There is potent ial. There is potential. That is the risk, Madam Chairman. But we fundamentally believe that there are sufficient safeguards in place in terms of being able to see their accounting activities, their financial activities on an annual basis; that there is going to be inspe ction of the minutes. And so, my position is, I do not anticipate any malfeasance going on in the Tourism Authority at all. And that is why I want to be involved in the appointment of the Board, to ensure that the people that are appointed to the Board— and that is going to be made public to the country. They are g oing to know the individuals that are going to be ap-pointed to the Board. Now, we heard people raise—they are raising names of their own former members, Dr. Ewart Brown. I do not know if they are insinuating that Members from that side, if they had this power, would en-gage in corrupt practices. I do not know if that is the insinuation.
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Point of order. Point of order. That is what I was waiting for.
POINT OF ORDER Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: What we are actually saying is that if Dr. Ewart Brown brought this piece of legisl ation you would have your people marching on Parli ament and going to Whitehall and the FCO [Foreign and Commonwealth Office], claiming that we are do-ing something worse than TCI [Turks and Caicos I slands] or Cayman. That is what they will be doing. It is a double standard. That is the point.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Well, Madam Chairman, the point I am making is that I am confident that the individuals that are going to be involved in executing the Tourism Authority will do so at a high level and with integrity. So, if the other side is …
Thank you, Member. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Well, Madam Chairman, the point I am making is that I am confident that the individuals that are going to be involved in executing the Tourism Authority will do so at a high level and with integrity. So, if the other side is accustomed to that type of behaviour going on, then that is with them. That i s with them. Okay? But my anticipation is that this A uthority will operate with the highest integrity. Now, if we look at clause 12(1), and I think many of the Members, as they refer to, we are talking about all of the various powers under [clause] 12(2). But the powers under clause 12(2) must be executed in relation to clause 12(1). And clause 12(1) says, “. . . House of Assembly 2236 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
the Authority shall have power to do anything for the purpose of discharging its objectives under this Act . . .” So it is not just about, Oh, we are going to go and invest in Gibbons Company. Or, We are going to just go buy land in Timbuktu. That all of the powers are connected to the discharging of the objectives.
Some Hon. Members Some Hon. MembersOoh! Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: And so, that is the co nnection there, Madam Chairman. So, it is not going to be just willy -nilly arbitrary investments, arbitrary bu ying of stocks. It has to be contiguous with the objectives under this particular Act. Now, Madam Chairman, the objectives are …
Ooh!
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: And so, that is the co nnection there, Madam Chairman. So, it is not going to be just willy -nilly arbitrary investments, arbitrary bu ying of stocks. It has to be contiguous with the objectives under this particular Act. Now, Madam Chairman, the objectives are defined in the Act. Now, we have just dealt with the $5.00. I understand. It is just common practice. What the $5.00 would have done was offset the cost of maintaining the register. But we have accepted the amendment. Control of staff, that was raised by the Ho nourable Member, Mr. C ommissiong, who is no longer in the House in the moment, under [clause] 6(3). So I do not know if he wants . . . He said clause 6(3), he had a question. “The Chief Executive Officer shall be responsible for the management of the staff of the Authority . . .” I do not know, Honourable Member. If you can just restate your question under clause 6(3) so I can just be clear on exactly what you wanted me to address?
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongIf I may, Madam Chairman. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Was it just whether or not the CEO would be hiring the staff? Yes.
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongYes, whether he will be hiring the initial, or dealing with the initial staffing r equirements of the office. And as a follow -up to that, I mean, I stated it at the time, was, and then, are we to assume that he will be dealing with the hiring issues …
Yes, whether he will be hiring the initial, or dealing with the initial staffing r equirements of the office. And as a follow -up to that, I mean, I stated it at the time, was, and then, are we to assume that he will be dealing with the hiring issues surrounding the existing staff? And what is the tim eline for the CEO’s position to be filled?
Hon. Shawn G. C rockwell: Thank you. Thank you, Honourable Member. The timeline is the 1 st of January. And he will be involved, intricately involved in the hiring of the staff. Clause 6(2)(d).
Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Shawn, excuse me.
The ChairmanChairmanMember! Mr. De rrick V. Burgess, Sr.: I am sorry, Minister. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: That is my cousin! That is my cousin, Derrick. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, we are relatives. It is getting late, you know. On this [clause] 6(3) about hiring a staff. You say thi …
Member! Mr. De rrick V. Burgess, Sr.: I am sorry, Minister. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: That is my cousin! That is my cousin, Derrick. Mr. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, we are relatives. It is getting late, you know. On this [clause] 6(3) about hiring a staff. You say thi s person will be in place by January. So, what you are saying is that the staff that will be made r edundant, the positions, they will not get this job until January? What is going to happen in that period of time?
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes. Thank you, Madam Chairman. We have stated publicly that the transition is going to go up until March 31 st next year. So, they will be employed until they are replaced within either the Authority or another Government entity. So there will be no cutting- off of employ ment between now when the Authority is fully functional.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes. So, the Honourable Member, Walton Brown, asked a question on clause 6 as well. Will we issue a directive on the performance measures? That is a matter of policy. And certainly, I do not believe that I as a Minister will be giving a directive. But certainly, policy would dictate that they produce performance measures. The Honourable Member, Zane De Silva, asked a question about the CEO. And he asked a question about whether or not the chairman had been appointed. No. We are looking for the chairman. The independent —actually, I am sorry. CEO, CEO.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaYes, clarification, Minister. I did not ask if he had been appointed. I asked if he had been chosen. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: No. the CEO has not been chosen. And so, we are in the process of trying to find the right CEO. The Honourable Independent Member asked a …
Yes, clarification, Minister. I did not ask if he had been appointed. I asked if he had been chosen.
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: No. the CEO has not been chosen. And so, we are in the process of trying to find the right CEO. The Honourable Independent Member asked a question as to whether or not we will adhere to that particular l ine in the ad. And I am not going to name who I believe he was referring to. But I can assure him that we will adhere to the line in that ad. And so, the look, the search for the CEO is on- going right now. The Honourable Zane De Silva asked about the interest register and whether or not a person will lose their contract. The position is that if an individual is in contravention of declaring their interest, that they are liable to summary dismissal. Whether or not any . . . I mean, if it was procured by fraud or anything of that nature . . . If it was procured in a proper way but for the declaration of interest, there is not a provision in this Act to then reclaim that particular contract. House of Assembly
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaSo, for clarification on your point . . . Thank you, Madam Chairman. So, if I am on the Board, and I am privy to information, and I receive a contract for $10 million, what you are saying is, is that . . . If I bid on it through …
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaOkay, $5 million. And if I bid on it through an RFP, and I was privy to the information beforehand because I was a Board member, I received that contract for $5 million, you are saying that I will be dismissed. But because I won it through an RFP, that …
Okay, $5 million. And if I bid on it through an RFP, and I was privy to the information beforehand because I was a Board member, I received that contract for $5 million, you are saying that I will be dismissed. But because I won it through an RFP, that is it? No other penalties whatsoever?
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, just to reiterate. In the legislation, the immediate consequence of that is that that member would be liable for summary dismi ssal. The Board has the power to create its own rules. And you flagged something that I am sure the Board can consider to be appropriate, that in the event of a major contract that you referred to, if the member or employee or whoever acquired it in such a way, then we can create rules to deal with that. So I appreciate the Honourable Member for that.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes. Clause 8(1) allows for, the Board may determine its own rules. Yes. The Honourable Opposition Leader did raise the issue about being a member o f the Board. We considered that model. We considered both models. The points that you made are cogent points. We felt that clearly the CEO would be working very closely with the Board. In order for it to be successful, the CEO will be working very closely with the chairman. We did not make the CEO a mandatory Board member because of the fact that we have reduced the size of the Board as such. We wanted to have the flexibility to be able to choose Board members. We do not want to have the Board with mandatory members stated in the statute. But by practice, we certainly en-visage the CEO being involved with the Board, atten ding Board meetings and the like. But it is not a requirement. This allows us to have the expertise of the CEO, as well as giving us the ability to appoint seven additional members to the Board. So we did not want to curtail ourselves and lose an appointment because we had reduced the number as such.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaYes, a point, Minister, a point, Minister. The Chairman: You have the floor. POINT OF CLARIFICATION
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThank you very much, Madam Chairman. Just getting back to the question and answer, which you answered very nicely; thank you, Mi nister. But on clause 8, when I was talking about this dismissal without notice, clause 8(2) refers to an em-ployee or an officer. But if you flick over …
Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. Just getting back to the question and answer, which you answered very nicely; thank you, Mi nister. But on clause 8, when I was talking about this dismissal without notice, clause 8(2) refers to an em-ployee or an officer. But if you flick over to clause 13, it talks about the Board member, which does not have the dismissal without notice in it. Do you see what I am saying? Do you see? So, to clarify, clause 8(2) is, “Any officer or employee.” It relates to an officer or employee, di smissal without notice. But in clause 13, it refers to Board members, but there is no immediate dismissal, or any other penalty for that matter, or any other r ecourse..
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes. The summary di smissal always refers to employment. It refers to employment. The Board are not employees. The Minister retains the authority to remove a member of the Board. And we have not gotten there yet. But in ci rcumstances, some of …
Thank you, Member. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes. The summary di smissal always refers to employment. It refers to employment. The Board are not employees. The Minister retains the authority to remove a member of the Board. And we have not gotten there yet. But in ci rcumstances, some of them are prescribed, but there is also a broad clause that allows for the Minister to remove if they consider that person not to be fit and proper. So, there are various clauses that will allow the removal of a Board member if we find that that individual has not acted appropriately. So, number one, they have to declare their interest. And if there is a situation as you have raised, Honourable Member, the Board has the right to create its own rules to address it. And I, as the Minister, or whoever succeeds me, would have the authority to remove that Board member if it is deemed their con-duct does not amount to being fit and proper. I think we dealt with clause 12(2)(b) in terms of the amount of the loan. It is not $1 million per loan. That is not the limit; it is aggregate. And again, we were talking about funding by the legislature and that we can go and buy stock in JetBlue and the like. Again, the Board has to conduct its affairs in accor dance to clause 12(1), to discharge the objectives un-der this Act. The Honourable Member David Burt, under clause 8(1), asked if that would apply to members of the department. It will. Anyone who has a contract with the Authority has to declare it. So, again, the pr evious Act, under the Tourism Board Act, there was an absolute proscription of individuals being part of the Tourism Board or being an employee of the Tourism Board if they had any contract. They could not be a part. House of Assembly 2238 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
We felt that that was way too limiting, because this is a small community. People are going to have an interest in tourism, you know, whether it be a res-taurant or the like, or own a taxi business. So, in this way, all we are saying is, declare it, and then it will be examined as to whether or not it would create a signi ficant conflict. So it will apply, Honourable Member, to the existing department. If they do have a contract, they have to declare it. Clause 14, how much will this cost? We have determined that what we are going to do, going for-ward, is the budget, as the budget exists right now, $27 million plus the tourism guest fee is approximately $30 million. That is the budget that we are going to stick with, going forward, for the Tourism Authority. Again, this is less than the previous budget and is 40 per cent less over the last five years. It is a significant amount of money, absolutely. We are cr eating a $30 million entity to try and turn around the tourism industry. Again, let me state that it is the inte ntion, and hopefully, the Authority will be able to collect more as it relates to the tourism guest fee. One of the Members stood up and said that the tourism guest fee previously was bringing in around $3 million. But that is what it brought in. That is not all it could bring in. In fact, the Chairman was able to raise a significant amount of the tourism guest fee after he took over. That was one of the principal objectives, and he was charged to get people to pay. And he raised a large amount of money in a very short period of time. So there is a great potential that the Tourism Authority fee can increase, going forward. But again, in relation to [clause] 12(2), like I said, that dovetails with clause 17, Madam Chairman, in that the Authority needs to have the ability to raise funds through commercial activities so that it can eventually be self -funding. And when we go on, we will see that those monies that it raises through commercial activities must be applied to further enhance the tourism product. So, you know, one Member said, Well, how is it going to be self -financing? Well, if we do not give the Authority the ability to engage in commercial acti vities, broad range, common commercial and corporate activities, it is not going to be able to raise sufficient funding. The question about delegation. Again, in clause 9, I believe the Honourable Member, Ms. Wil-son, “The Board may, in its discretion, appoint from among its own members . . . committees” and the like, and it can delegate. But i f you look at [clause] 9(3), “A committee appointed under this section shall, in the performance of functions delegated by the Board under subsection (2), at all times be subject to such directions, conditions and restrictions as may be i mposed by the Board and shall adhere to all policies of the Board.” So, those committees, whoever receives the delegated power, must —at all times will be subject to the directions, conditions and restrictions imposed by the Board. So it is not just going to be, I delegate this entity the authority, and the Board walk away and let it do what it has to do. It has to do it within the cond itions and directions of the Board. And then further, under clause 9(6), it says, “The chairman of each committee appointed under this secti on shall ensure that the committee prepares and submits to the Chairman a report of the functions delegated to the committee, and the progress thereof, before the end of every quarter . . .” So, again, the chairman will be aware, fully aware of the activities of those committees, and those committees will be under the direct control of the Board. So, we see sufficient checks in terms of the delegation of powers there. Madam Chairman, I believe I have covered most of the questions that were posed.
The Chai rman: Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 through 16? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Public Safety. You have the floor.
Hon. Michael J. Scott: Madam Chairman, thank you. With your leave, Madam Chairman, I wonder if the Minister would field the question that I posed. It might be properly brought under [clause] 8. Will the ending of the positions in the Depar tment of Tourism result in the breaking of services? And has that been considered? Will those G overnment employees, those civil servants’ redundancies result in breaking of services for the purposes of pen-sion?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Health and Seniors. You have the floor.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThank you, Madam Chai rman. I had two questions that the Minister did not address. One was, clause 6(3) with regard to disc ipline. And I had asked the question— [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaYou got me, Minister? You say you got me? Okay. I will not repeat it. But of course, for the— [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaOkay. When the positions are filled, once the redundancies have been made and the positions have been refilled, one, will the new House of Assembly employees have union representation? And two, would the chief executive officer, who is responsible in [clause] 6(3) for . . . One of the things …
Okay. When the positions are filled, once the redundancies have been made and the positions have been refilled, one, will the new House of Assembly
employees have union representation? And two, would the chief executive officer, who is responsible in [clause] 6(3) for . . . One of the things he is respons ible for is discipline. So, will that happen in consult ation with the unions? And the second question I had was with r egard to [clause] 12(1). And the Minister was just referring to [clause] 12(1), and he was talking about the fee, the 2.5 per cent fee. My question is, have all the fees been paid by those responsible to pay?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. To the question about breaking service from the Honourable and Learned Member, we are working through all of that right now. Clearly, those …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. To the question about breaking service from the Honourable and Learned Member, we are working through all of that right now. Clearly, those are some complex issues as it relates to pensions, and even complex issues as it relates to the overseas emplo yees. But it is our intention that the employees remain whole. It is our intention that they remain whole. To the Honourable Member, Mr. De Silva, whether or not the Authority, the staff is unionised, that would be a matter for the employees. Like every other entity, they would have an opportunity, if they have the sufficient numbers and they get together and decide they want to be unionised, and they can make that decision. And if they do choose to be unionised, then all of the necessary consultation with the union and collective bargaining agreements will apply. So, that is entirely up to the employees. And we anticipate that that will be the case. In terms of outstanding fees, my information, I believe was at the end of June, our last financial statement, that $7,000 of fees are outstanding. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? If there are no other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15, Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I think that we are all going to …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15? If there are no other Members that would like to speak to clauses 6 through 15, Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I think that we are all going to have breakfast together tomorrow morning. It looks like it. So, Madam Chairman, I will pick up with clause 16. Clause 16 provides for revenue that the Authority —
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, ma’ am?
The ChairmanChairmanAre you going to go from 16 to the end? I would like to have confirmation so that ever yone can . . . Are you moving clauses 16 through 29? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, that last exercise was quite extensive because there wer e so many clauses.
The ChairmanChairmanYes. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: So I will go up unto clause 26. Oh, you want to go to clause 21? We are doing them in fives.
The ChairmanChairmanRight, clauses 16 through 21. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Okay. Hold on. What is the preference of the Opposition? [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Okay. They are asking me to go to the end, so we will go to the end.
The ChairmanChairmanFine. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, clause 16 provides for revenue that the Authority may collect from fees and charges authorised by the Minister. The clause further provides for the authority to retain such of the revenues collected as the Minister may determine after consultation with the Minister of …
Fine.
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, clause 16 provides for revenue that the Authority may collect from fees and charges authorised by the Minister. The clause further provides for the authority to retain such of the revenues collected as the Minister may determine after consultation with the Minister of Finance. Clause 17 enables the Authority to retain profits obtained from its commercial ventures in order to fund tourism projects. Clause 18 provides for a limitation to the liabi lity of the Authority to such funds and assets as are held by the Authority at the time of any partic ular claim. Clause 19 provides that the financial year of the Authority shall end on the 31 st of December in each year. Clause 20 provides for the accounts of the Authority and requires that the Authority maintain proper statements of its financial affairs and that it should prepare in respect of each financial year a statement of its accounts in such form as required by applicable accounting standards. Clause 21 provides for the annual report. The Authority is required to submit to the Minister as soon as practicable after the end of each financial year an annual report on the exercise of its functions during that year. Clause 22 provides for the annual report and statement of accounts of the Authority to be made and transmitted to the Minister. The Minister is required to lay a copy of the annual report and statement of ac-counts before both Houses of the legislature. House of Assembly 2240 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Clause 23 provides for the preservation of secrecy with respect to the affairs of the Authority by members of the Board or any person who is, or is ac ting as, an officer, a servant, an agent or an advisor of the Authority, and creates an offence for the contr avention of the clause. Clause 24 provides for the making of rules by the Board relating to its functions under the Bill. Clause 25 provides for the making of regul ations by the Minister for the purposes of the Bill, and in the making of such regulations, the Minister may pr escribe anything that is necessary or convenient for the carrying out of the provisions of the Bill. Clause 26 provides for the repeal of the Tourism Board Act 2012. Clause 27 provides for transitional arrangements relating to contractual and operational matters relating to the affairs of the Board under the Tourism Board Act 2012. Clause 28 provides that the Boar d appointed immediately after the commencement of the Act shall be appointed by the Minister after consultation with the chairman, and the terms of appointment shall be two years for two of the members, three years for three of the members, and four years for two of the members. Clause 29 provides for the Minister to cause the Act to come into operation on a date or dates as the Minister may determine. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Minister. Are there any Members that would like to speak to clauses 16 through 29? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Tourism. You have the floor. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. Again, you know, there is a lot of copying and …
Thank you, Minister. Are there any Members that would like to speak to clauses 16 through 29? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Tourism. You have the floor. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. Again, you know, there is a lot of copying and pasting here, and you will hear me repeating it over and over again. But we understand that. [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: But let me just say this, Madam Chairman. The part when it comes down to Part 6, Repeal and Transitional Provisions. This is a new part.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWhic h part? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Part 6, Repeal and Trans itional Provisions.
The ChairmanChairmanClause 26? Are we there? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Clause 27, sorry. Clause 27(3), Part 6.
The ChairmanChairmanPart 6. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Part 6, clause 27(3). And I mentioned this before: “All rights, assets and property vested in or in any manner held on behalf of or for the purposes of the Board immediately before the commencement of this Act shall be vested in the Authority.” …
Part 6. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Part 6, clause 27(3). And I mentioned this before: “All rights, assets and property vested in or in any manner held on behalf of or for the purposes of the Board immediately before the commencement of this Act shall be vested in the Authority.” As you are aware, the Tourism Board has assets as of today. And I would have thought the Mini ster would report to this House, because the financial statements were due . . . Well, the end of the year was March 31 st. And they were due September 30th. So I would have thought by now the audit would have been done, because basically they should report . . . This again. This is it. So there should be audit stat ements out there done by the Board. So I am asking a few questions. Have there been some financial statements that have been audi ted by the Auditor General? Have the financials been audited? And how can we ensure that the assets that are transferred over from the Tourism Board are the correct assets? And so we should see some financials, as the legislator who authorised the Tourism Board and who is supposed to report to the legislature what those financials are. So we should have some information, basically. So, how much cash does the Tourism Board have right now? What are their liabilities? What are their outstanding accounts receivable, or what is due by the hotel? So, basically, we need to have some answers before we transfer assets over from the Board to this new Authority. I see the fines have gone up. And I think that is . . . we understand the point about the initial Board, so that is clear. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 16 through 29? The Chair recognises the Opposition Leader. You have the floor. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. A very simple question, whi ch I will just leave for the Government to determine. …
Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 16 through 29? The Chair recognises the Opposition Leader. You have the floor. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. A very simple question, whi ch I will just leave for the Government to determine. It says in clause 19, “The financial year of the Authority shall end on 31 st December in each year.” If the majority of the funding is coming from the taxpayer, would it not be wiser if the end of the fiscal year be March 31 st to coincide with Government’s fiscal year? Is it something that we should change, instead of to December 31 st, change it to March 31st? Minister, do you want me to repeat my question?
House of Assembly
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Marc A. R. B ean: Clause 19, the end of the f inancial year is December 31st. But in terms of coordination, since it is taxpayers’ funds, should the end of the financial year in fact be March 31st, to coincide with Government’s fiscal year?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members? Thank you. The Chair recognises Mr. T. E. Lister, from Sandys South, constituency 33. You have the floor. Hon. Terry E. Lister: Thank you, Madam Chairman. The first clause I want to look at is clause 20(6). This states that, “The auditor may …
Thank you. Are there any other Members? Thank you. The Chair recognises Mr. T. E. Lister, from Sandys South, constituency 33. You have the floor. Hon. Terry E. Lister: Thank you, Madam Chairman. The first clause I want to look at is clause 20(6). This states that, “The auditor may at any other time report to the Minister through the Authority upon any matter arising out of the performance of his audit.” This clause is a bit unusual, but it is actually a good clause because without it, the auditor would not have acce ss to the Minister on his own or her own. And so, it is a good clause to add in. I have not seen it before. But I want to just say that it is a good clause and, you know, commend the Minister and the Attorney General for putting it in. However, if you tur n the page and look at [clause] 20(2), it says, “The accounts of the Authority shall be audited by the Auditor -General or by an auditor appointed annually by the Auditor -General.” Well, during my career, I had the good fortune of being ap-pointed, when I was working on my own in 1981, by Larry Dennis to do the Bermuda College audit two years in a row. In later years, in the early 1990s, at Deloitte’s we subbed for Larry Dennis on a series of audits. When we did those engagements, our rel ationship was always with Larry Dennis. We did the work. We reported to him. And then he talked to the client. We did not do that. Clause 20(7) says, “Where the Auditor - General has not been appointed to be the auditor, a copy of the audited financial statements and any r eport made by the auditor shall be forwarded to the Auditor -General at the same time they are submitted to the Authority.” This is completely out of order. This is not how it works. However, I talked with Ms. Atherden. We had a little chat about it. And here i s the solution. You simply remove the words “at the same time” and r eplace it with “before.” So, you do not have to do an ything complicated. Just change those three words, “at the same time” (four words) and put in “before.” B ecause that is what is going to happen. The sub- auditor works for the Auditor General. And your relationship is with the Auditor General at all times, having estab-lished that in clause 20(2). In clause 20(2), you say, My auditor is the Auditor General. However, the Aud itor General can appoint Deloitte and Touche. (Or, well, it isn’t Deloitte [and] Touche anymore; Deloitte.) [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Terry E. Lister: No, unfortunately. And so, to make that go all the way through, you simply have to take “at the same time” out and put “before” in there. And I would encourage the Minister to do that rather than using the power to vote and voting through what is here. What is here does not work; it is not the right way. So, changing those four words will make it work. If we look at clause 21, clause 21, under annual report, says, “The Authority shall, as soon as practicable after the close of each financial year but not later than 30 June of each year, submit to the Mi nister an annual report on the activities of the Authority during the preceding financial year.” That all sounds quite fine. That is what we want. We want a report. However, if we go down to clause 22, tabling of annual report, clause 22(2) says, “The Minister shall as soon as practicable after receipt of the annual report and annual statement of accounts cause a copy of each to be laid before both Houses of the Legisl ature.” Now, the Minister has not seen anything. No one has reported anything to him unusual. On the 29 th of June, he gets the statements. He looks at them , and he has questions. And he is smart enough and clever enough to ask questions that the chairman does not have direct answers to. So, there is some digging. It may even require a meeting or two with the auditor. And we work this out. And then at that point, the Minister says, I am perfectly happy with these statements. You do not have to change them. You do not have to change a word in them. I understand them. I found something that was unusual. It has now been explained to me. When I table them in the House and some smart aleck—maybe Terry Lister —asks me a question, I will have the answer, because I have done the work to get the answer. Are you with me? Now, if he gets the statements on June 29 th, he is not going to get here for July 15th. That means he is going to table these in the first sitting on the first Friday in November. The year end is December 31. Please do not put us in a position where we are going to look at statements on Friday, the 5 th of November, for the last year ending December 31. S o, to correct that, Mr. Minister, in clause 21, where it says “30 June,” let us make it “May 31st,” please. And it will work fine. You will have no problem coming to this House before the 15th of July if you have a May 31st cut-off for people to report to you. So, I am not presenting you with an amendment for us to vote on. I am giving you the solution to the problem for you to accept. I am not interested in a vote. If you are happy with that, then we can do it and I think it will all work for everybody’s benefit. Thank you.
House of Assembly 2242 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 16 through 29? The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Finance. You have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I am on clause 27(8). And I am looking at [where] it says, “The annual estimates approved for purposes of the Board in respect of the financial year in which this Act comes into operation shall be deemed to be annual estimates of the …
Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I am on clause 27(8). And I am looking at [where] it says, “The annual estimates approved for purposes of the Board in respect of the financial year in which this Act comes into operation shall be deemed to be annual estimates of the Author-ity for the remainder of the financial year, but those estimates may be varied by the Authority in such manner as the Minister and the Minister of Finance may approve.” I might be a little bit dense at this hour. But I do not get it. Because it is talking about the Board, and I do not know where the line item to the Board and the estimate is. I know there is a line item to the Board and the department. So maybe there could be some clarity there. Is this talking about the entire budget of the Department of Tourism? Or is it just a minor grant that is given to the Board? Clause 27(8), I would love some clarity on that, please.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 26 [through] 29? The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Finance.
Mr. E. David BurtAnd what I would say is, just as a follow -up, Madam Chairman, I would like to support the recommendations of the Independent Member and the member of the Public Accounts Committee, and hoping that the Minister will take that on board, as they seem to be minor, cosmetic changes …
The ChairmanChairmanPerfect. Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 16 [through] 29? No other Members. Minister? Oh, the Chair recognises the Shadow Attorney General and Shadow Minister of Legal Affairs. You have the floor.
Mrs. Kim N. WilsonYes, just a quick question. And this is concerning [clause] 24, the power to make the rules, the Board can make rules concerning any mat-ters relating to the functions. I wonder if the Honour able and Learned Member can just answer this ques-tion for me, because I am just wondering …
Yes, just a quick question. And this is concerning [clause] 24, the power to make the rules, the Board can make rules concerning any mat-ters relating to the functions. I wonder if the Honour able and Learned Member can just answer this ques-tion for me, because I am just wondering if . . . On one hand, you have this power for the Board to make their own rules insofar as the functions under the A ct. And one of them [at clause 24(a)] includes “the manner and method of collection of the tourism authority fee and late payment fees . . . (b) collection of any travel . . .” et cetera. So, under [clause] 24, they have the power to make rules. And I wonder if that is somewhat incon-sistent with the fact that in [clause] 15, you have cer-tain penalties being imposed, for example, if a person is guilty of an offence. And then likewise, in [clause] 23, the confidentiality clause, which also has pr escribed penalties, including fines as well as terms of imprisonment. My question is whether or not the making of the rules in 24 could be deemed inconsistent with some of the other statutory provisions that already exist. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Minister, you have the floor. I think that question might have to be asked again, but just in case. I do not know whether they . . . Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I am going to try and address the various questions. If …
Thank you, Member. Minister, you have the floor. I think that question might have to be asked again, but just in case. I do not know whether they . . .
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I am going to try and address the various questions. If I omit a question, please just re- ask. The first question was by the Honourable Shadow Minister in relation to the accounts. First of all, in relation to the audited accounts, the deadline for the audited accounts is September 30 th. And that is fast approaching. We have already been informed by the Office of the Auditor General that they will not be ready. The audited statements will not be ready by September 30 th. They are working on them. They are not making the progress that they would like. But we hope to get those accounts soon. But I can report to the House that as of June 30 th, the Tourism Board had $1.7 million in the bank. And as I said earlier, there was $7,000 out-standing as it relates to fees from various properties. So that is sort of a snapshot as of J une 30 th of this year. Now, in relation to the financial year, this particular request came from the industry that it is better for them to manage the financial year based on the calendar year, because it is more prudent and effective for them to be able to set out, because although they get the monies from Government 1 st of April, their budget is already committed. And so they want to be able to generate their budget as it relates to the cal-endar year. So they are going to have to be able to manage those funds in a way that is spread out, especially after they get their first allocation. But it was the industry; after consultation with the industry, they said it would be better to manage their finances on a calendar -year basis rather than the Government f inancial year. I am going to just try to do this from memory now. I know there was a question as it related to clause 27(8). I believe it was from the Shadow Mini ster of Finance. And he was talking about the annual estimates approved for the purposes of the Board, and he was querying what the Board was. The Board House of Assembly
is defined in [clause] 27(1). So we are talking about the Board, meaning the Board established under the Tourism Board Act. So any allocation for the Board under the Tourism Board Act will be the allocation, going forward, for the Tourism Authority, in addition to all of the other means of funding.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: I just answered that. But you were reading your BlackBerry. Okay. I am sorry. I believe there was a question on clause 20(7). I just jotted down that clause. Oh, yes. The suggestions by the Honourable Member, the I ndependent Member. Both suggestions, I have consulted . . . the financial margin aside deemed to be reasonable. So we will do that. Thank you. Thank you very much.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Finance. You have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you, Madam Chairman. I thank the Minister for his answer. I was not in the Chamber, but I did hear him from the Gallery. If the Minister could please clarify his answer for clause 27(8). I just want to be absolutely and cry stal clear. Because, of course, it …
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I thank the Minister for his answer. I was not in the Chamber, but I did hear him from the Gallery. If the Minister could please clarify his answer for clause 27(8). I just want to be absolutely and cry stal clear. Because, of course, it says “the Board” in this clause, means the Board established under the Tourism Board Act. I understand that. He has his technical officers here. So, first question is, can he please tell me how much money was in the estimates that were given to the Tourism Board? And in the second instance, does the money that is approved for the entire Department of Tourism, as I am saying that you are estimating it to happen in the future years, does this cover that? Because it does not speak to the Department of Tourism. So I am guessing that there is a transitional date, et cetera.
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: If I can understand, yes, it does not cover the budget allocated to the Depar tment of Tourism. But we did not want to constrain the Government to provide the exact same estimates from previous years from the department. We are making a commitment, and we have made a commitment, as I said earlier, that we will provide a commensurate amount as it relates to what was given to the Depar tment of Tourism. As it relates to the Board, I believe that the only revenue that the Board was raising was [from] the tourism guest fee. I believe that was it.
Mr. E. David BurtHowever, the clause that we are speaking to speaks of “the annual estimates approved for the purposes of the Board in respect of the finan-cial year in which this Act comes into operation . . .” And I am just asking if the Minister can confirm how much that was. …
However, the clause that we are speaking to speaks of “the annual estimates approved for the purposes of the Board in respect of the finan-cial year in which this Act comes into operation . . .” And I am just asking if the Minister can confirm how much that was. He does say that does not belong to the Department of Tourism. How much was that? I guess I am just confused. I remember the budget ses-sion. I do not remember an allocation to the Board.
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: And I think the Honour able Member may be correct. I do not know the figure. I believe that the only revenue that the Tourism Board was able to collect was from the tourism guest fee. I know you are referring to the estimates. So …
Minister?
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: And I think the Honour able Member may be correct. I do not know the figure. I believe that the only revenue that the Tourism Board was able to collect was from the tourism guest fee. I know you are referring to the estimates. So you may be correct that there was no estimate allocation to the Board. But this was just to provide the Authority with the same financial opportunities that the Board had previously. And as I said earlier, we intend to provide a commensurate amount —it may go down, but a commensurate amount that was given to the Depar tment of Tourism.
Mr. E. David BurtJust real quick, Madam Chairman. So, would it be safe to assume that the Mini ster, that his date for transition is going most likely to be in coming into operation of the Tourism Authority a date that will be April 1 st? The reason why I pick that is …
Just real quick, Madam Chairman. So, would it be safe to assume that the Mini ster, that his date for transition is going most likely to be in coming into operation of the Tourism Authority a date that will be April 1 st? The reason why I pick that is because, clearly, the money for the Department of Tourism is still allocated to the Department of Tourism. If there is no assignment of that money, clearly the Tourism Authority will not have money to operate.
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, it is correct. We have stated publicly that that is the date that we expect to be operating. Thank you.
The Cha irman: Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Tourism. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I just want to ask one question of the Minister. As far as the amount that is going to be given to the Board, the Tourism Authority, do you expect to get that money on a quarterly basis? Or will the funding be given up front? What is the expectation on that? And I just want to clarify. I cannot remember. But the funding in the Tourism Department included the regulatory part, or was it under the Ministry? I cannot remember that.
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, thank you, Honourable Member. House of Assembly 2244 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report And I am glad you asked that question because that question was asked earlier (I think it was the Honourable Shadow Finance Minister), whether or not w e were going …
Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, thank you, Honourable Member. House of Assembly 2244 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
And I am glad you asked that question because that question was asked earlier (I think it was the Honourable Shadow Finance Minister), whether or not w e were going to be dissolving the Department of Tourism? Are we going to be making 47 positions r edundant, and the like? We are dissolving the Department of Tourism. And the function of licensing and regulating the hotel properties will remain with the Government. And so whether or not it remains in the Ministry of Tourism Development and Transport or whether or not the Government deems it appropriate to put it in another Ministry, that it may fit better, that is to be determined. But the regulatory function that is now currently executed within the Department of Tourism will not go to the Authority, because then it would be regulat-ing itself. So we thought it would be prudent to retain that. And it is not a large office. And the individuals will continue to do the work that they have been doing all this time. We anticipate that it will be, all the monies will be allocated in terms of the funds coming from the legislature at one time when all the other budget all ocations are made. However, as you know, the Tourism Authority fee is collected over a period of time. And then there was an interpolation by my cousin, the Honourable Member, Mr. Burgess, who asked, Do we have any money left as it relates to the Department of Tourism? And I am glad he asked that, because I want to make it abundantly clear that every cent that has been paid, that has been spent so far in relation to the Tourism Authority Act, the transition, the Governor’s model has all come from the Tourism Board fund. Not one dollar has come from the Consolidated Fund, not one. Okay? So the Department of Tourism’s budget has not been impacted at all by this whole process. Everything has been spent from the Tourism Board. Yes. Thank you.
Mr. E. David BurtMadam Chairman, just as a clarif ication, and I thank the Minister for answering the question, because I do not believe in his spirited r esponse in the general debate he addressed that par-ticular issue. And that particular issue is that he is abolishing the Department of Tourism. However, there …
Madam Chairman, just as a clarif ication, and I thank the Minister for answering the question, because I do not believe in his spirited r esponse in the general debate he addressed that par-ticular issue. And that particular issue is that he is abolishing the Department of Tourism. However, there are the six positions in hotel administration. Is he also abolishing those? And when it gets transferred to a department . . . I guess I am asking, are all the 47 positions being made redu ndant? Or is it just the 41 positions and the six in hotel administration might be transferred? Or are all the positions being made redundant, and those individ uals that are working in hotel administration do not have to re- apply to the Authority; they have to re- apply to Government for their positions?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, thank you. I apologise. I thought I was clear on that. Not all . . . And now, the Office of Licensing and Regulations has individuals in that particular area that do not actually . . . Like, one individual is …
Thank you, Member. Minister?
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, thank you. I apologise. I thought I was clear on that. Not all . . . And now, the Office of Licensing and Regulations has individuals in that particular area that do not actually . . . Like, one individual is in r esearch. He does research. But he is classified under that section. But the employees that do the specific licensing and regulating of the hotel properties, they do not have to apply. They will be transferred. They will remain within the Ministry, or we will transfer them to another department that is more appropriate. So, those positions will not be made redundant.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Tourism. You have the floo r. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes. I do not recall if the Minister mentioned the costs for redundancy.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: No, no. We have not mentioned that. Because we do not know who is g oing to opt for redundancy . So— [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: So, we have looked at it, and we are anticipating that there is going to …
Thank you. Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: No, no. We have not mentioned that. Because we do not know who is g oing to opt for redundancy . So—
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: So, we have looked at it, and we are anticipating that there is going to be a cost. But we cannot say what it is going to be. We are hoping that every individual is either going to be placed in the Authority or is going to be placed els ewhere. But as Members have raised, somebody may say . . . And let me just make this clear. Let me make this clear. There is going to be no redundancy pa yment unless there is a loss of employment. So, although the positions are going to be made redundant, that will not trigger a redundancy payment. So, employees can say, I neither want to go to the Authority, nor do I want to go to another Gov-ernment department. My position has been made r edundant. I would like my redundancy pay. And we would honour that. But we do not think that most employees are going to take that option, because I am sure they would rather be employed than seek redundancy. But I do not, Honourable Member, have an estimate, be-cause we just do not know who is going to choose that option.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses [16] to 29? There are no other Members. House of Assembly Minister? [Pause]
The ChairmanChairmanWhat I would like to propose is that we actually officially approve the amendments. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, Madam Chairman. If you would allow me, if someone has actually written them down, I will try and go from memory. I believe we are looking at clause . . . …
What I would like to propose is that we actually officially approve the amendments.
Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, Madam Chairman. If you would allow me, if someone has actually written them down, I will try and go from memory. I believe we are looking at clause . . . And if the Honourable Independent Member can . . . oh, if he can find his seat, because he may be able to help me. But I believe clause 20(7), we are taking out the words “at the same time,” omitting the words “at the same time,” and we are inserting “before.”
The ChairmanChairmanThat is correc t. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: And that is it for that particular clause, clause 20(7). And then, in clause 21, we are changing the date from the 30 th of June to the 31st of May.
The ChairmanChairmanAnd the amendment? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: And we are accepti ng that, yes.
The ChairmanChairmanAnd the amendment to clause 13(3)? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes. (If someone can hand me the amendment.) We are agreeing to amend section 13 with the rubric interest register. It will now read, clause 13(3), delete the words “upon the pa yment of $5.00 or such other fee as …
And the amendment to clause 13(3)? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes. (If someone can hand me the amendment.) We are agreeing to amend section 13 with the rubric interest register. It will now read, clause 13(3), delete the words “upon the pa yment of $5.00 or such other fee as may be pr escribed.”
AMENDMENTS TO CLAUSES 13(3), 20(7) AND 21
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the proposed amendments, that would be to clause 21 of the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013, the words “30 th of June” be removed and replaced with “May 31st”; and clause 20(7), the words “at the same time” be r emoved and replaced with the …
It has been moved that the proposed amendments, that would be to clause 21 of the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013, the words “30 th of June” be removed and replaced with “May 31st”; and clause 20(7), the words “at the same time” be r emoved and replaced with the word “before”; and amendment to the Bermuda Tourism [Authority] Act 2013, clause 13(3), delete the words “upon the pa yment of $5.00 or such fee as may be prescribed.” It has been proposed that these amendments be approved. Are there any objections to that motion? No objection. Agreed to.
[Gavel] [Motion carried: Amendments to clause 13(3), 20(7), and 21 passed.] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I now move clauses 1 [through] 29 as printed.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberAs amended. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: As amended.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. It has been moved that clauses 1 [through] 29 be approved as amended. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clauses 1 through 29, as amended, passed.] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, I would like to move the Preamble.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Preamble be approved. Is there any objection to that motion?
Mr. E. David BurtMadam Chairman, just a point of order, a question. Do you not have to go through the Schedules?
Mr. E. David BurtNo problem. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, I move the Schedules.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Schedules be approved. Are there any objections to that motion? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: The Honourable Member is raising that we have not discussed the Schedules.
The ChairmanChairmanOh. Thank you. Minister, you have the floor. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, the Schedules. Part 1 deals with the Resignation and Removal from Office. Madam Chairman, these are standard clauses and are similar to the existing Tourism Board Act. Part 2 deals with the Procedure for Meetings of …
Oh. Thank you. Minister, you have the floor. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Madam Chairman, the Schedules. Part 1 deals with the Resignation and Removal from Office. Madam Chairman, these are standard clauses and are similar to the existing Tourism Board Act. Part 2 deals with the Procedure for Meetings of the Board. Again, relatively standard clauses, so I would take my seat and entertain any questions that the Honourable Members may have.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. House of Assembly 2246 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report Are there any Members that would like to speak to the Schedule Part 1 and Part 2? The Chair recognises the Opposition Leader; you have the floor. Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Madam …
Thank you. House of Assembly 2246 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Are there any Members that would like to speak to the Schedule Part 1 and Part 2? The Chair recognises the Opposition Leader; you have the floor.
Hon. Marc A. R. Bean: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Madam Chairman, Part 1, clause 2, “The Mi nister, acting after consultation with the Board, may remove a person from office as Chairman or member of the Board if he is satisfied that such person . . .” and I will move down to (b) “has been convicted (whether before or after his appointment) of a criminal offence.” Madam Chairman, I will mention it to the Minister. The Minister, with this clause as is, and this is not a personal thing, but I want us to look at it clearly, because we on our side follow the principle of r edemption. Okay? Let us make that clear. So, the Minister right now, based on this Schedule, can disqualify or remove a person from a position that he himself is not qualified for, and some of us on our side. So, going forward, I think that has to be changed in the spirit of redemption. Because you might have some people who might have gone through something way back when, but as time has gone on, have been able to what they call rehabilitate themselves and are now functional members of soci ety. So, I think that we should really look closely at that clause about removing people based on prior convictions. You know, it does not really square with our attempt to help people, or restorative justice. I am sure that the Minister can relate and understand our point.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to Schedules, Parts 1 and 2? Minister, you have the floor. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. I actually anticipated that [question] being raised, and I appreciate the manner in which the Honourable Member raised …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to Schedules, Parts 1 and 2? Minister, you have the floor. Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. I actually anticipated that [question] being raised, and I appreciate the manner in which the Honourable Member raised it. I believe . . . I am not comparing it right now. I believe that that is in the Tourism Board Act. And I think that the part that is crucial is the fact that it is discretionary. It is “may remove.” It is not mandatory. So keeping in mind that I believe that there are Hon-ourable Members in this Chamber who have demon-strated that you can make a mistake at that level and redeem yourself and be a very constructive member and be deemed worthy to serve in an entity such as this, and that is why it is not mandatory; it is discr etionary.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to Schedules, Part 1 and Part 2? There are no other Members. Minister? Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would like to now move the Schedules.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that Schedules Part 1 and Part 2 be approved. Are there any objections to that motion? There are no objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Schedules Part 1 and Part 2 of the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013 passed.] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: I move the …
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Preamble be approved. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: And now I very happily move that the Bill be reported to the House, as amended. [Laughter]
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House, as amended. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013 was considered by a Committee of the whole House, and passed with amendments.] House resumed at …
It has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House, as amended. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013 was considered by a Committee of the whole House, and passed with amendments.]
House resumed at 10:32 pm [Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair]
REPORT OF COMMITTEE
BERMUDA TOURISM AUTHORITY ACT 2013
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIs everybody awake? [Inaudible interjections and laughter] House of Assembly
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Members. We have had the Second Reading of the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013 approved with amendments . And we will now move on to Order No. 2. Order No. 2. Yes, you guys can go home now. [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOrder No. 2 is the Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013, in the name of the Minister of Ec onomic Development. The Honourable Dr. Grant Gibbons, the Mini ster for Economic Development, you have the floor. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move …
Order No. 2 is the Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013, in the name of the Minister of Ec onomic Development. The Honourable Dr. Grant Gibbons, the Mini ster for Economic Development, you have the floor.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move that the Bill entitled the Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013 be now read the second time and committed. Mr. Speaker, this Bill —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSorry, sorry, Minister. Are there any objections to that? There are none. I am sorry, Minister. Please, excuse me. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: It is getting late, Mr. Speaker. I will try and move through it as quickly as I can. BILL SECOND READING INCENTIVES FOR JOB MAKERS …
Sorry, sorry, Minister. Are there any objections to that? There are none. I am sorry, Minister. Please, excuse me. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: It is getting late, Mr. Speaker. I will try and move through it as quickly as I can.
BILL
SECOND READING
INCENTIVES FOR JOB MAKERS ACT 2013 Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Mr. Speaker, this Bill amends the Economic Development Act 1968 and the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Act 1956 and modifies the incentives which were introduce d by the original Incentives for Job Makers Act 2011. The primary purpose of this Bill is to encourage companies to retain existing Bermudian jobs in Bermuda and create a more welcoming environment for new companies that may be considering Bermuda as a place to do business. It does so by providing a direct incentive to key job makers within these com-panies by exempting them from work permit requir ements and offering the ability to attain permanent res-idence in Bermuda. The Bill is designed to send a clear message that those who create jobs in Bermuda for Bermudi-ans are valued members of our social and economic fabric. Mr. Speaker, while the original Incentives for Job Makers Act 2011 was arguably well intentioned and provided incentives that had included a waiver of work permits and the grant of permanent residency for job makers, it was not attractive enough to be effec-tive. Despite a long period of consultation with industry stakeholders during the drafting of the 2011 legi slation, the final Bill that was tabled in the past in 2011 was considered by many industry stakeholders to be inadequate and a disappointment. Direct feedback from the stakeholder groups indicated that, in their interpretation, the 2011 legisla-tion created a higher risk of harming economic growth and long- term opportunities for Bermudians rather than moving them forward. Mr. Speaker, Honourable Members will be aware that in the five- year period from 2008 to 2013, the workforce in Bermuda declined from approximat ely 40,000 down to 35,000 workers, resulting in more than 3,000 unemployed Bermudians and almost 2,000 non-Bermudian jobs leaving the Island and not being replaced. According to figures released in April by the Department of Statistics, the Island lost nearly 2,000 jobs between 2011 and 2012 alone. This loss of spending power and opportunity has had a massive negative financial impact on Bermudian families, Ber-mudian businesses and its Government revenue. In fact, the recent release of GDP data by the Depar tment of Statistics shows that a progressive decline in 2010 and 2011, culminating in an even larger negative 4.9 per cent real GDP decline in 2012. In a May 2012 press release, the Association of Bermudian Insurers and Reinsurers (that is, ABIR) reported that 2012 was the fourth year in a row that the number of employees in their member companies declined. ABIR commented (and I quote), “Most worr isome is that the five ABIR members with historically the largest number of employees in Bermuda have reduced their employment during that time by an a verage of 23%.” The release continued with (and I quote), “A ccelerated action by the Government to encourage ABIR members to locate senior executives here in Bermuda would be helpful.” And they noted that there is a direct correlation between these senior executives being in Bermuda and employment opportunities for Bermudians. Mr. Speaker, Bermuda needs more jobs. The previous administration was asked for accelerated action. This administration is delivering that action. These amendments, as well as other policy and legi slative changes, are laying the foundation for economic renewal and job creation. Mr. Speaker, at this point, I would like to discuss some of the difficulties with the 2011 Act and the changes in this 2013 Bill designed to address them. A significant sticking point has been the delay in the job makers’ ability to be eligible to apply for permanent residency. Under the existing Act, the earliest oppor-tunity afforded is January 1 st, 2015. This means that any job maker has to wait a minimum of three years from the time the 2011 act was gazetted until they can House of Assembly 2248 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
apply for PRC status, a source of significant frustr ation by industry stakeholders. When you look back at the insurance and r einsurance company incorporations and the way s in which they set up in Bermuda, you can see that there are senior executives who have been helping compa-nies flourish and creating jobs for Bermudians for well over 10 years —that was the class of 2001—and in some cases, for as many as 20 years, the class of 1993 being a good example. So, to insist on making many of these senior executives wait until a minimum of January 1 st, 2015, to apply for permanent residency negates the actual purpose of the Act —which is to encourage key executives to remain in Bermuda now. With every departure of a senior position, Bermudian jobs are lost or put at higher risk for a f uture loss, and less money flows to the economy. If the boss leaves, then jobs go with him or her. It is the way that business works. Those in decisi on-making seats are far more inclined to make the long- term commitment to Berm uda when they feel they are welcomed, appreciated and valued. Then the decision of where they want to be based becomes more than just a numbers game. It becomes an emotional decision. Individuals in companies that truly feel they are valued and welcome in Bermuda are far more likely to contribute their finan-cial and human support to charitable causes in our community. Mr. Speaker, the proposed amendments in this Bill are also imp ortant for attracting new bus inesses. Companies who are considering a move to Bermuda look for a barometer. That barometer is the group of existing companies and job makers who are already in Bermuda. If existing stakeholders are not happy and do not believe they are welcome, it is more difficult to attract new business. Mr. Speaker, I will now discuss some of the specific provisions that this Bill addresses. As mentioned earlier, the existing Incentives for Job Makers Act 2011 provides for the earliest eligibility date to be January 1 st, 2005. This means that people currently cannot apply for a PRC before January 1st, 2015. This Bill now proposes to bring this date forward. Job ma kers can now apply immediately on commencement, provided they are eligible to do so. Therefore, if a person’s company first met the conditions of section 3B of the Economic Development Act on or before January 1st, 2002, and the individual is deemed to have met the requirements for exemption from a work per-mit on or before that date, then, provided that the indi-vidual has been ordinarily resident in Bermuda for at least 10 years, they can apply for a permanent res idency certificate. Mr. Speaker, this Bill will allow a person to apply for the exemption from a work permit and per-manent residence certificate at the same time. As the Act currently stands, in order to be eligible for the PRC, they must first apply for the exemption. This proposed amendment would allow them to apply for both simultaneously. Mr. Speaker, I would now like to address the issue of fees. The existing fee for the exemption from the requirement of a work permit will remain at $20,000. However, this Bill proposes to reduce the application fee for a PRC application from $120,000 to $25,000. Feedback from industry indicated that the high fee is discouraging eligible applicants from appl ying. The current fee of $120,000 has been deemed tantamount to selling Bermuda. This perception is r einforced by the fact that this fee is more than 100 times greater than the fee normally charged for a PRC application, which is currently $1,100. There is also a perception that the current fee does not recognise the significant contribution that these companies and individuals have made and con-tinue to make to the economy and in the employment and development of Bermudians. The vast chasm that exists between the two fees has not been well r eceived, given the enormous contribution made to Bermuda over the past years. This is an appropriate time to address this significant contribution. Mr. Speaker, at the end of 2012, international business activity alone was directly responsible for 3,867 jobs, direct jobs. Of those jobs, 65 per cent were occupied by Bermudians, spouses of and PRC holders. In fact, less than 3 per cent of the internati onal business workforce is comprised of PRC holders. In a recent submission, ABIR advised the Government that their 22 members annually generate nearly a billion dollar economic impact to Bermuda. This money gets spent on Bermudian salaries, rents, housing, construction, Government taxes, restaurants, taxis, hotels, retail outlets, sporting events, charities and, in fact, a multitude of other local businesses, organisations and individuals. Other sectors of the international business industry also make a significant contribution. The ec onomic benefit is real, and we cannot afford to lose it. Mr. Speaker, following consultation with stakeholders, a fee of $25,000 is considered to be reasonable and reflect the importance and desirability of residency, while acknowledging the contribution of the company and the individual. Mr. Speaker, another provision of this Bill is that it transfers the responsibility for the review and approval of the incentives for job makers’ applications from the Minister of Finance to the Minister of Ec onomic Development. As the Bill is intrinsically linked to the Economic Development Act 1968, and its intention is exactly to stimulate economic development and the creation of jobs, it makes sense to put this under the remit of this Ministry. The Minister of Home Affairs, who is responsible for immigration, will continue to be consulted. Mr. Speaker, given the different types, sizes and contributions of businesses that create jobs, it is clear that a one- size-fits-all approach is not going to House of Assembly
work. What may work for a reinsurer may not work for an asset manager or a hedge fund. Under the current Act, 25 is the minimum number of employees with Bermudian status that a company must employ in or-der to be eligible for exemption status. While the Mi nister is currently given discretion to consider compa-nies that have fewer Bermudian employees, the message has been sent that this will only be for exceptional circumstances. This Bill proposes to reduce that minimum number from 25 to 10. The primary motivation for this reduction is to motivate new companies —that is new companies —to move to Bermuda, bringing their executive- level staff, thereby providing jobs to Bermudians and spending money in the economy. Mr. Speaker, to be clear, the Bill proposes to maintain vigilance with regard to protecting the inter-ests of Bermudians and sets a realistic standard by adding a caveat to the requirement for the company to employ Bermudians at all levels. This caveat indicates “subject to the availability of suitably qualified Berm udians.” It has been noted that the existing Act imposes an unrealistically high bar on companies, where there are simply no Bermudians available that are qualified to be employed at all levels of the company. Currently, the Economic Development Act r equires that to be eligible for an exemption from Part V of the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Act 1956, the continued presence of the company must be de-pendent on the applicant remaining in Bermuda. Now, in practical terms this does not encourage those who may not be directly responsible for the domiciliation of the company, but are responsible for the location of jobs. This includes executives who are responsible for the continued presence in Bermuda of a department or business unit, rather than the entire company. For example, a senior vice president of claims may have oversight and responsibility for where she places her 20- person claims team. For example, she could have them in Connecticut, Dublin or Bermuda. However, she may not have a say in the actual loc ation of the company. That notwithstanding, because she is a job maker, creating jobs for Bermudians in Bermuda, she should be eligible for exemption. The object of the Act is to create new jobs and to retain existing ones. This Bill reinforces that goal and clar ifies its eligibility by changing the wording from “continued presence of the company in Bermuda” to the continued presence of jobs for Bermudians in Berm uda. Mr. Speaker, we want to ensure that those executives responsible for a significant number of Bermudian jobs remain in Bermuda, creating and maintaining jobs over the long term. Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a final point on the changes in the Bill. This Bill will be r emoving the stipulation of the maximum number of five persons that can be exempted from Part V of the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Act 1956 at any one time. Under the current Act, companies that employ a large number of Bermudians, for example, 100 or more, can only have as many exemptions, a max imum five, as a company that employees 25 Bermudians. This does not provide an incentive to hire as many Bermudians as possible. This maximum number will be proportionate and dependent upon the total number of Bermudians employed, and addressed, as it is und er the existing Act, in a set of guidelines. In determining maximum numbers, the Mini ster will also take into consideration a new section set-ting out various factors, including, among others, the significance of the company to the economy of Bermuda and the protection of local interests. Mr. Speaker, I think I should be clear about the companies and individuals we are referring to in the context of this Bill. These important businesses are critical to our economy. And a common thread through all the companies that have successfully a pplied for concessions to date is the commitment they have made to recruiting, developing and promoting their Bermudian staff. Each of the successful compa-nies also has a global presence. However, each has stated in their application that they are committed to remain in Bermuda for the long haul. Some even i ntend to increase their presence in Bermuda. So far, the companies that have successfully applied have demonstrated their commitment: 1. to employ Bermudians; 2. to develop and promote Bermudians; and 3. to support Bermudian students. The individuals from these companies who may become eligible for PRC should not be made to wait until January 1 st, 2015. We need to make sure that they and the Bermudians jobs they are respons ible for have a good reason for staying here now. Our demonstration of our commitment toward encouraging these companies and their job- making executives will serve as a beacon for other companies seeking a f avourable, comfortable and welcoming jurisdiction. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would like to extend my thanks to the Ministry of Home Affairs, that did a lot of work in putting together the sections and the legislation that we are debating tonight. And par-ticularly, the Minister did a lot of work with the consul-tation involved with many of the international companies. I would also like to thank Bermuda First, ABIC (which is the Association of Bermuda International Companies) and ABIR (the Association of Bermuda Insurers and Reinsurers) for their time and input that they put forward to improving this legislation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With those introductory remarks, I move that the Bill entitled the Incentives for Job Makers Act be read for the second time.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister Gibbons. House of Assembly 2250 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report The Chair now recognises the Honourable Member Walter Roban. You have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Of course, I am happy to give the first r esponse to this amendment Bill, the Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013. Just to let you know, Mr. Speaker, although this is obviously being led by the Minister of Economic Development, I am leading …
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Of course, I am happy to give the first r esponse to this amendment Bill, the Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013. Just to let you know, Mr. Speaker, although this is obviously being led by the Minister of Economic Development, I am leading first, but [then] there will be certainly substantive comments made by the Shadow Minister of Economic Development, Mr. Glenn Blakeney, as well, on this. So, just to let you know that he will follow at some point to other sub-stantive comments because—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. There is no problem with that.
Mr. Walter H. RobanOkay. Also, I wish to thank the Minister for providing his brief for this debat e, which has been helpful in following, and to even further cry stallise comments that I would like to make. Firstly, as we have already stated as a party, and as our Leader stated, we …
Okay. Also, I wish to thank the Minister for providing his brief for this debat e, which has been helpful in following, and to even further cry stallise comments that I would like to make. Firstly, as we have already stated as a party, and as our Leader stated, we welcome the bringing of this Bill for a number of reasons. One, we have called repeatedly for this particular Incentives for Job Makers Act, the original Act in particular, to be used by this Government as an effective tool to address issues that they have already stated publicly are priorities — jobs, job investment, and re- igniting the economy. It was one of the main pillars of the Opposition Leader’s statement to the nation, among other measures that we felt would be extremely helpful in what the Go vernment seeks to do in this area. Because the irony is, Mr. Speaker, that certainly for the past year, and this Act, as the Honour able Member has already stated, has been on the books since January 2012, but they have not men-tioned for most of this year anything about it. It has been there as a toolkit, obviously part of the Economic Development Act and as a part of the immigration framework for them to apply and to effectively use with whatever tools they felt were necessary to go to the marketplace. And I am not just talking about the Bermuda marketplace, but the international marketplace, to talk about what Bermuda was doing differently and was prepared to provide as an incentive to bring business of the calibre of which the Act was designed to attract into Bermuda, a calibre of business that will bring substantial policy investment, a calibre of business that will bring personnel and teams who are like add itions to our environment, would clearly create jobs, jobs that are sustainable, jobs that are substantive and jobs that have a lasting impact on our economic environment. Yes, this Bill has a threshold set in a number of ways. And that was because it was set to attract a certain tier of business, a certain tier of business per-sonnel, not only here in Bermuda, but also internationally. Because certainly, when this Act was set up, there were already persons here. But the goal was to attract more and to go into the marketplace and attract more. And we appreciate that there were persons l ocally who were clearly interested in what was done by the Incentives for Job Makers Act 2011. And applic ations were made under its framework. Certainly, the former Finance Minister gave a press conference, I believe, in August of last year where an announcement was made (or late in 2012), announcing that there were applicants who had taken up the opportunity that the Act provided. So clearly, there was interest. We also can certainly state that this Act was certainly inspired by recommendations from the Bermuda First report and other recommendations that had been provided pub-licly about ways to ignite the economy and to make Bermuda much more suitable for business inves tments, which is why I am slightly puzzled by the Minis-ter’s implication that nothing was being done or that, as he says on page 2, because I am wondering what that means, in that t he Minister —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPage 2 of what? What are you rea ding?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOh, his brief. Oh, all right. I do not have that.
Mr. Walter H. RobanWell, the Minister was kind enough to provide it to us. So I am referring to it.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay. You are privileged. [Laughter]
Mr. Walter H. RobanYes. The Minister spoke about the action that the Government was taking. I am sorry. It is on page 3, the actions that the Government was taking, i.e., that Bermuda needs jobs. The previous administration was asked for accelerated action. This particular Act was a part of the accelerated action …
Yes. The Minister spoke about the action that the Government was taking. I am sorry. It is on page 3, the actions that the Government was taking, i.e., that Bermuda needs jobs. The previous administration was asked for accelerated action. This particular Act was a part of the accelerated action that business had asked for. There were other things done, but they are not the subject of this particular legislation. So I am not going to speak about —
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Point of clarification, if the Honourable Member will allow.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. He is allowing. POINT OF CLARIFICATION Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Yes. Thank you. House of Assembly The accelerated action was asked in 2012 after the Act had been passed in 2011. The accelerated action was from ABIR, asking the Government of the day to do something in …
Yes. He is allowing.
POINT OF CLARIFICATION
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Yes. Thank you. House of Assembly
The accelerated action was asked in 2012 after the Act had been passed in 2011. The accelerated action was from ABIR, asking the Government of the day to do something in addition to what was already there. In other words, they were unhappy about the Job Makers Act that you had passed. They wanted accelerated action in changing it. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Carry on.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Mr. Speaker, for that. And I hear the point. But I am arguing another point.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThat accelerated action was taken, and this was a part of the accelerated action that the Government was taking. There were other things that were done, but they are not the subject of this Bill, so I am not going to raise them. I want to stay strictly to what …
That accelerated action was taken, and this was a part of the accelerated action that the Government was taking. There were other things that were done, but they are not the subject of this Bill, so I am not going to raise them. I want to stay strictly to what we are dealing with. And I was not [involved] in whatever di scussions [took place between Government and ABIR]. So I cannot attest to that or whatever they said. But I can certainly attest that this Bill and ot her measures taken were a part of the action that bus iness asked for, and the Government was responsive. It may have not been satisfactory to a few, and they asked for more to be done, and that is fine. But this was a part of the accelerated action. It was certainly different from where we were prior to January when this Bill was passed in 2012. And it created an env ironment where certainly members of ABIR in partic ular, because there are other business groups who clearly are in the country. As I recall, Bermuda First actually made an endorsement of the original Bill. And they are som ewhat the authors of the ideas around this sort of r esponse, as did other business groups speak to the positive presence of the Incentives for Job Makers Act, the principal Act. Unfortunately, for about the past year, Mr. Speaker, this Government has not said much about it. But it has been there. It has been there since January 2012 and was there post -December of 2012 for them to use as a tool, amongst the many things that they have d one. Now, I have heard the Honourable Minister say and he certainly stated in his brief that not many, there was not interest. Well, we know that companies did apply to be subject of the incentives. I think there were about eight to 10, perhaps, was the i nitial a nnouncement. I do not know what the higher number is; certainly, perhaps the Minister can give us more i nformation about that, because the Minister did not say anything specifically about that in his brief. It is just a reference to lack of interest. But there was a number, and there must be a number that he can give as to how many took it up. Ten? Twenty? I know at least eight to 10 did apply prior to December 17 th. Perhaps since then, more have applied; maybe not. But cer-tainly the Minister, I hope, can give us more clarific ation on that. So, we have not heard much for the past year. But we are comforted because we have asked, as a party, for the Government to deploy the Incentives for Job Makers Act for the purposes upon which it was designed. No w, they have come with amendments, which are reflected in the [Incentives for Job Makers Act] 2013, of which we are discussing today. And I think I have given some reference to what the authors of the Act desired from it. Might I also say that there were also, for the aid of understanding the Act, there were guidance notes created, which I believe were very helpful to those applicants, and perhaps we can reference those guidance notes during this discussion, because it does give some clarity to the lega lese, and I believe was very helpful, certainly it was helpful to myself to understand some of the purposes around the Act. But, Mr. Speaker, I am now going to talk a little bit more about the changes that the Government has proposed. It is very late. I suspect there are a few people who might want to speak about it. But I am going to make sure that efficiently as possible I will discuss some of the issues that we are concerned with. There is the issue of the eligibility of persons being moved from the qualifying date of January 2005 to January 2002, which is the actual alliance with the 2012 date of which the Act was actually assented to. So that, essentially, those persons who now are inter-ested in making an application under this legislation do not have to wait for the following two years that are left, or so, but they can actually take up an opportunity right now. Certainly, the Government must have had discussions with persons and did feel that that was an appropriate adjustment. I can say I have also had some discussions with industry persons around these issues. And I un-derstand about the adjustment of the date so that per-sons can take it up now. And, as the Government has argued, if they feel that making that adjustment actual-ly affords a greater opportunity to retain or to attract some of the job makers that they say will take it up, fine. I would be interested to know how many persons have expressed interest in taking up this particular legislation and its framework, now that the adjustment has been made, because that, again, was not reflec ted in the Minister’s brief as to, if this was such an urgent, urgent step to take to move the dates or just move the 10- year qualification back so that it aligns with the assent date, how many . . . What is the actua l demand out there that they got from ABIC or ABIR or whomever? Can they anticipate how many applic ations are going to be made once this Bill is passed? House of Assembly 2252 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
I would be interested to know, because certainly that would give credence to their argument, if they h ave one, that we are going to see an immediate impact by those persons making the applications, po-tentially getting the qualifications, the PRC qualific ation, and that whatever feeling they get from being successful will ensure a certain level of job protection. And I would be interested to know how many potential —well, I think the Minister made reference to the amount of jobs generally for the industry, but per-haps the Minister, if he generally knows how many might possibly take it up, he can align that wi th how many Bermudian jobs will actually be protected and perhaps potentially gained by the movement in that direction of this qualifying date. One of the other changes that is here, which perhaps is the most —perhaps the most concerning is clause 3, which is the certificate, adjusting the certif icate price from the $120[,000] down to the $25[,000]. I do believe, Mr. Speaker, that a part of this process was also to raise some money. I mean, let us face it. Why do these things if it is not going to raise some real hard currency? It is one thing to have the spillover effect that might be quantifiable in a sort of indirect way. But what about the direct impact on the coffers of the country that seemingly have been depleted be-cause of the economic challenges, as well as the ex-odus that the Minister eloquently referred to in his statement? And the Minister referred to quite a few figures about the amount of persons who have est imated job reductions that have exited the country and how that obviously needs to be mit igated. But certainly, with a fee of $120,000, and let us say, you know, there are 10 or 20 chief executives or company CEOs or owners or directors of the most highest -earning and largest companies that are in Bermuda that decide to take up this particular Incentives Act, Mr. Speaker, I mean, that is at least some monies that are going to come in to the country. And if that is up to 20 . . . Because I am assuming, Mr. Speaker, that we are not going to have thousands, unless the Government can prove, we are not going to have necessarily thousands immediately that are go-ing to stand in line to take advantage of this Act. Or perhaps, again, we would like to hear what the Government knows about the level of interest in applying for the Act, which merited them pr oposing this change in the date. But $120,000 to a top- level executive, Mr. Speaker? Why is that such a difficult fee? I am not a chief executive of a multinational company, so I do not know. But I am asking the question. I have difficulty, frankly, believing that that fee is a difficult number to handle if you are within the class of persons that we were seeking to attract to Bermuda and to keep in Bermuda under this framework. It is the person that makes the decisions as to where a company locates on the globe, makes the decision as to the level of investment that the company will make, and ultimately influences how many people will be employed by that company. And in most cases, Mr. Speaker, that is someone who is making six figures or more. And if you lo ok at the list of compensation with some of the top persons within the reinsurance industry alone, they are making a lot more than the $120,000. In some cases, that is what their bonuses are on an annual basis. And if, Mr. Speaker, after 10 years, having been in Bermuda . . . Now, let us consider it. Based on the argument of the Honourable Minister that somehow the fee was prohibitive, well, I had to think about that when I heard this argument, Mr. Speaker. Because you are talking about someone who is likel y making a million dollars just in salary. Let us not talk about bonuses and other compensation that might be attached to their package, for a company that might be actually making hundreds of millions of dollars. The $120,000 might be actually what they pay just in rent over the past 10 years. Because I do not believe, Mr. Speaker, that that individual, who might qualify under the Act, has come to Bermuda with the belief, whenever they came, that they might ultimately get status . . . I am sorry, not status. I am sorry; Freu dian slip, Mr. Speaker. PRC. All right? PRC status in 10 years. That is not why they came to Bermuda. And I have not, in my own discussions with members of the industry, because despite what the other side might think, you know, we do know people in this country who work in insurance and reinsurance and other captive investment or investment funds or whatever. We do know people like that around. Not saying . . . Although I am not one of them, I do know people like that. So I can at least understand the perspective u pon which they are here. They have come here because of the env ironment that Bermuda has provided as a centre of business, whether it be in insurance, financial service and the likes. I doubt and . . . Well, whatever a dvantages, they could be tax related. They could be industry related. They could be regulatory related. They have come for a number of other reasons. I doubt that anyone set up their company here, whenever they did, whether it be in 2002, 2001, 1993, with the belief that they were going to get what-ever was available to them to stay here permanently. Their existence was linked to their company being here, with the attributes that Bermuda provided them when they came here. Clearly, they were attracted to coming here, and if they have been here since 1993 and 2002, it is clear that Bermuda has already provi ded them with success. And that success will continue. I doubt . . . Now, perhaps, it is a subjective view of the Government or some of the people they spoke with. But I am not convinced that that is the r ationale for them staying here. If they came here with the business, they are here, if the business remained successful and viable from the standpoint of its com-petitiveness, and if Bermuda provides that environHouse of Assembly
ment, certainly other reports that we have actually had over the years, that is actually why they stay here. The issue of them getting permanent residency or some form of permanence on that level is not the i ncentive of why they stay here. Now, I accept that perhaps that is what they have been told, Mr. Speaker, by those whom they have spoken to. But I am not convinced, because in addition, most of the incentives under the Job Makers Act have little to do with that. The PRC awarding or the entitlement is a by -product of having actually had successive years of activity and success in Bermuda. So, if all the other things do not actually work, Mr. Speaker, the PRC is meaningless, because they will not stay here for 10 years. They will not stay here for 10 years if the business is [not] profitable. They will not stay here if they cannot access talent. They can-not stay here; they are not going to stay here for all the other reasons other than the PRC. The PRC is something that is not directly related to the success of the business. The business stays in Bermuda b ecause Bermuda is a successful environment for them doing their business. Now, I am not saying this to deny that these job makers deserve the opportunity to openly make those applications, because it is in the or iginal Act. The framework is there. And I understand why the Government might have made this adjustment. In my own conversations with certain business persons, they have said that, you know, it was felt at the time that requiring the additional years was not appropr iate. And that is fine. But for whatever reason, the Government of the day made that decision and put it in the Act. And I think I understand. I think from a Bermudian’s perspective, I understand why. Because let us just say maybe we put a certain value on acquiring that particular status for an yone. And we think that perhaps, Well, listen. We are not just going to give it to you. You know? This is something of value, and this is the ultimate—this is the ultimate component of having already made a commitment, and we respect the commitment. We honour the commitment. We acknowledge the com-mitment. That is why this Act was set up in the first place, because it acknowledges, Mr. Speaker, that there is a constituency of individuals already here that has contributed greatly to Bermuda’s economic success of this particular era. That is why the Act exists. That is why the Government responded in this way, and with other measures, to ensure that there was something in place to keep this class of people ass ociated with Bermuda, connected with Bermuda Clearly, if they were prepared to bring their families here and facilitate a level of investment that has created jobs for Bermudians, at every aspect of their company, from top to bottom, and that business has been sustainable and successful, then, Hey. We create a package of incentives to actually benefit you with hopes that you will stay here and continue to stay here and continue the activities that you have already done. So, perhaps within the 2015 component, that is part of what it was. Because we as Bermudians value certain things. It was not to slight these persons. It was not to make it more difficult for them to attain the ultimate status of PRC. It was just to, you know, you know, Yes, you will get it, you know, ultimately, as a part of the process that this Act provides. So, I perhaps understand why subjectively some of the executives might have felt, Well, why are you making us wait? We have already done good for Bermuda. And the Government is responding to that request by adjusting the date. But I go back, Mr. Speaker, to the $120,000 to $25,000 reduction. I think that, as I have already stat-ed, there are some real problems with that. Because I happen to think, as I have already said, that the $120,00 0 is not a difficult figure for this particular class of individuals. I would argue, Mr. Speaker, that the $25,000 fee that has been proposed . . . and it was very interesting what the Honourable Minister said in his statement. And I will read it (on page 5), Mr. Speaker: “The current fee of $120,000 has been deemed tantamount to selling Bermuda. This perception is reinforced by the fact that the fee is more than 100 times greater than the fee normally charged for a PRC application, which is currently $1,100.” Well, Mr. Speaker, how many percentage [points] do you believe [make up] the difference between the salaries of those executives who might apply and the Bermudian chambermaids? Or to the Bermudian construction workers, some who are not working, Mr. Speaker? There is a big difference from the salary that most Bermudians make and the sal aries that we know that persons in this industry make. We know that. And as I have said, this $120,000 is equal to some of the regular bonuses that some of their members make in the millions, plus salaries. This is equal to perhaps the school fees per year that they may pay for one child, if that is all they have, the $120,000. It is equal to perhaps the rent, the average rent that many of them are paying for accommodation a month, Mr. Speaker! I think we can probably easily verify that, right? Some are paying $11,000, $12,000 a month in rent for a home for their families, Mr. Speaker. And in some cases, this is a drop in the bucket. Now, as I said, over a 10- year period, and in anticipation of having to pick up, you know, to get this application, I would think that a person of that calibre can save the money pretty easily and afford it. And I would say this also, Mr. Speaker, just to be frank, $25,000 is belittling. And if the Minister is going to say here that it is tantamount to selling Bermuda, what is $25,000? It is giving away Bermuda. That is what it is doing. It is giving away Bermuda. It is underselling Bermuda. Bermuda is worth a lot more, and the op-portunity, Mr . Speaker, to exist in Bermuda for a lif eHouse of Assembly 2254 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
time at a comparative advantage to most Bermudians, making a lucrative salary with a successful multinational company, to me, to some, that is a priceless opportunity. And paying $120,000 to have that opportunity for a lifetime, to some is demeaning, just the 120 grand, Mr. Speaker. There are some countries, Mr. Speaker, that are offering opportunities to have a permanent residence in their country, in whatever form they are proposing, at half a million. And there are some classifications, there are work permits, Mr. Speaker, in Cayman, that cost you $30 grand, just Cayman alone! So, even a permit to get into Cayman to work is more than the $25 grand. That is just to have a work permit. Places like Dominica, St. Kitts, Antigua are [proposing that for] half a million dollars or so you can get a passport so that you can live there, and perhaps you will buy property and you will be able to buy property and invest and so on —for half a million dollars. And I love my Caribbean brothers and sisters. But I do think that Bermuda has a lot more to offer than they do. And they are offering whatever they have for a lot more money than we are offering here. This $25,000 fee is demeaning, Mr. Speaker. It is like an insult. It is o ffering Bermuda—it is like gi ving away Bermuda. That is what it is doing. I do not see, and I do not accept the argument of the Minister, and I had this discussion with some industry people. And I do not accept the argument from them. In fact, some industry people almost plead their poverty to me, that somehow that this fee was prohibitive. Real-ly? Tell that to a construction worker, who cannot even afford to migrate to another country where they might be able to get a job. Tell that to a chambermaid. Tell that to some of our other low income persons who are trying to make ends meet. So, for me, the executive, $120,000, working for a top- 20 reinsurer or captive management firm, that the fee to stay in your country at $120,000 after 10 years is prohibitive . . . I do not think . . . And fran kly, those Bermudians who have become aware of this, Mr. Speaker, are not buying it. But I can understand why the industry body would be running this game. And this is a game. And, Mr. Speaker, I can apprec iate that there are some, because there seems to be this cultivation, Mr. Speaker, of creating panic in Bermuda about our economic situation. [Laughter]
Mr. Walter H. RobanRight? We have headlines sa ying, Bermuda at the brink, and these are an effort to almost scare some people. Now, Mr. Speaker — [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Walter H. RobanMr. Speaker . . . and I am speaking to you, Mr. Speaker. I am not listening to the chirping on the other side, the irrelevant chirping. What I am saying is this, Mr. Speaker. There seems to be an effort to cultivate a certain panic amongst the citizenry, even …
Mr. Speaker . . . and I am speaking to you, Mr. Speaker. I am not listening to the chirping on the other side, the irrelevant chirping. What I am saying is this, Mr. Speaker. There seems to be an effort to cultivate a certain panic amongst the citizenry, even to the point where we have certain executives and key people in business actually wanting to go further than this! To say that we have got to do more than just the PRCs, Mr. Speaker. There are people who want to go further than that. Right? But that is not the topic of discussion for this. Well, maybe it is, but I am going to be focused. And I want to stick to the PRC issue and to the Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013. Right?
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberPhase one.
Mr. Walter H. RobanSomebody murmured, Phase one. Well, we will see. We will see. You know something, Mr. Speaker? I will divert just a bit because of something I remember. I have a pretty good memory about most things. W hen it comes to politics, my memory is pretty good. Most of my …
Somebody murmured, Phase one. Well, we will see. We will see. You know something, Mr. Speaker? I will divert just a bit because of something I remember. I have a pretty good memory about most things. W hen it comes to politics, my memory is pretty good. Most of my Members would attest to that. I remember a lot of stuff. And I also remember when a certain party that no longer exists put out a platform in 2007, what they were proposing, Mr. Speaker, around PRCs. And guess what, Mr. Speaker? Most of the Cabinet were a part of that election team in 2007. So, when I see things like this, and I am speaking more now, Mr. Speaker, about what I am getting from the public and what my Members are get-ting from the public. People get suspicious about when we see things. We see the discounting of the Bermudian birth right. Because this is a discounting! I do not accept and I do not believe my members on this side have said that the reduction from $120,000 to $25,000 is reasonable. Some of the other amendments, I frankly understand. Because I understand, as the Premier eloquently says repeatedly about the urgency of now. That maybe now, by adjusting the date, the qualifying date, some people who are right now making applications, they are really a job maker and they are going to actually . . . And this will help to keep them here and keep Bermudian jobs. I can accept that. But the fee? Mr. Speaker, no. Uh- uh. What price Bermuda, Mr. Speaker? That is what I want to know. It just seems as if there are some in this co mmunity . . . And I am not accusing directly the OBA of this. But this speaks to a climate that is being created in this country, Mr. Speaker, of panic and fear. And thus, what is the response to that? Desperation! And instead of certain key people in the country, Mr. Speaker, actually seeking to reassure and lead the people out of the fear, they stoke it. And I am not sa ying that we should not be acting with urgency. I am not saying that we should not be using all of our brain House of Assembly
power and ability and resources to tackle the country’s economic situation. I am not saying that. What I am saying is that creating this sort of puzzle that creates this fear bomb for some people is not realistic. And responding to the calls of whether it be John Charman or Mr. Barnett or the Chamber of Commerce about what we have to do to keep bus iness here, when none of those suggestions actually benefit working people of this country, is not in our interest! I am sorry. And that is how I feel. That is how my party feels on this issue. That $120,000 reduction to $25,000 is unrealistic. I do not understand why the Government is going there. Why not $80,000? What was the metric or what was the hypothesis that you built to bring it down to $25,000 to almost wither away any fee? Shoot! At this rate, it is almost like you should give it away for free, because that is what you are doing. You are gi ving away Bermuda for free, with a $25,000 fee. Why not $80,000? Why not reduce it by 20 per cent, 30 per cent? Why? I would be interested in the rationale for it. So, my objective question, after all I said, is, Why $25,000? Why not 20 per cent? Why not $80[,000]? Why not $90[,000], Mr. Speaker? So, per-haps they can answer that question before the oth er questions that I have presented. Mr. Speaker, I will move on, because I do know that the hour is late. But I felt it important to make those points that we must move away . . . You know, we must all value Bermuda in some way. B ecause I can see other countries value their country a lot more, irrespective of their desire and need to en-courage investment. Even the United States of Amer ica, our greatest partner, to actually be able to make an economic migration there, one of the categories requires you to invest $1 million in a business and acquire property, and you can get a Green Card. So let us understand. There are some categories worth $1 million. There may be 500 for some, but there are some worth $1 million, Mr. Speaker. I am not saying it is not 500 in some categories, but there are different categories of visa entry to the United States; it is not just one. And this investment does not bring citizenship. It gives you the Green Card, whatever it is. If it is $500,000, it does not matter whether it is . . . And even at $500,000, it is a lot more than what we are putting here as the price tag for a piece of the rock and to be a part of the rock, to have a destiny related to the rock, to people who already have a comparative advantage in the rock! And I say all this not to belittle their presence, Mr. Speaker. I tell everybody else, I am a product of the international business history of Bermuda. My mother was a VP at Marsh & McLennan, started at Inter-Ocean Management, Johnson & Higgins [J&H], where a lot of Bermudians worked. So I understand the Bermudian involvement with international bus iness. My life history has been associated with that industry, my development as a person. I understand the value of it. It has been in my life since I was a child. So there is no one over there who can tell me about international business. It has been a part of my life. So I know it. I know some of the people who were the heads in the 1980s and the 1970s when I was a young boy, packing bags to shred paper, people like Patty Stevenson at J&H [Johnson & Higgins] , Wayne Morgan, others. I know them. As a boy, I was around them. So I know what the business is about. I have known those people, and others. But I also know a lot of Bermudians who also came out of the industry and are still in there, because of my own family connection with some of these companies. So I appreciate it. I do not say this as som ebody who is trying to demonise international business. I appreciate its value to Bermuda. I appreciate the contribution it has made and the contribution it has yet to make to our country. And I do believe they will play a role with its recovery; I believe that. But I also believe that the relationship has got to be respectful. And we as Bermudians and what we desire must be respected. And unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, part of the history of Bermudians within the economy, within business, has been one that has not been quite equal all the time, so some of our hesit ation to accept changes like this is built around ha ving had that history, and of still being denied oppor tunity, still seeing non -Bermudians push forward when we want an opportunity and a chance to compete. That is still part of the history. So that is why many Bermudi-ans are hesitant to accept amendments like this. Just going to the next one, Mr. Speaker , clause 5 of the Bill speaks to the 25 to 10. Now, this is a very interesting proposal. And I will not spend too much on it —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, you know we go into Committee. So when we get into Committee, we deal specifically with those.
Mr. Walter H. RobanYes. Okay. But I am talking generally of the Bill and what the Bill is going to do. I am not going to get there. But there is the issue of the movement of the figure from 25 down to 10. Again, Mr. Speaker, the original Act spoke to, a …
Yes. Okay. But I am talking generally of the Bill and what the Bill is going to do. I am not going to get there. But there is the issue of the movement of the figure from 25 down to 10. Again, Mr. Speaker, the original Act spoke to, a core component of that Act was about creating opportunities for Bermudians, that Bermudians will be a part of every strata of their com-pany. And the number 25 was the number set as a benchmark. Now, the Minister made an argument about that number being prohibitive. But, Mr. Speaker, the Act clearly states in the original Act that the Mini ster . . . There is a specific provision on how that works. Now, the Minister said that the 25 number was prohibitive. But I disagree with that because, House of Assembly 2256 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
clearly, if you look at the original Act, Mr. Speaker, the original [Economic Development Act 1968] [section] 3B(3), having talked about the 25 persons having Bermudian status as staff, it says, “The Minister may take into considerati on– [(a)] the size of the company; [(b)] the significance of the company to the economy; [(c)] the existing or likely economic situation in Bermuda; [(d)] the protection of local interests and; [(e)] generally, the interests of the community as a whole, lowering the minimum number of persons with Bermudian status a company should have on its staff for the purposes of subsection (2). The Minister said that is only done under —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWhere are you reading that from?
Mr. Walter H. Roban— what it states. So where the Minister said “only under exceptional circumstances,” I disagree. That is not the proper interpretation of that clause. Actually, and I think it is fine that the Minister had that discretion that if a company, just for example, Mr. Speaker, a company, not one …
— what it states. So where the Minister said “only under exceptional circumstances,” I disagree. That is not the proper interpretation of that clause. Actually, and I think it is fine that the Minister had that discretion that if a company, just for example, Mr. Speaker, a company, not one that is already here. I am going to deal with one, because we are really —I think this is really about getting people to come to Bermuda, Mr. Speaker. Let us just say a company — but certainly those who are here should take advantage. But let us just say that we have a company here or a company coming from overseas. Let us just say they are from some exotic area of international finance, or what ever. But they want to come to Bermuda. They want to set up. They make an application under the Incentives for Job Makers Act. He has got . . . Let us say that the gentleman has six executives and intends to have 15 staff, or start with 15 staff, not including executives, of which, let us just say 10 of them are going to be Bermudian. And that is just a start. And he comes to the Government and says, I do not meet the 25 requirement. I am going to be bringing $500 million of investment into Bermuda. I can guarantee you that I want to be here, and I know that there are Bermudians already here, because I have met some of them in the industry who I am going to be recruiting. And I am going to have a Bermudian secretary. I am going to have a Bermudian IT specia list. I am going to have a Bermudian analyst. I am bringing my family here. We are going to, you know, have a Bermudian landscaper —whatever! But essentially core for their company, he is telling us, This is what is my plan. And I am also going to have a training programme to train young people to actually be investment advisors. And I am going to have other training programmes, as a part, because I want to develop this as a Bermudian company. B ecause I love Bermudians. Right? If he comes with that, yes, the Minister should knock down every door around the country to make sure that person comes here! Because he has the power to vary the 25 number based on all those things. And it is not a special circumstance. If a sp ecial circumstance means that the company does not fit the exact benchmark, then the Minister has got the discretionarily power to vary. And it is stated strictly in the Act. That is why moving from 25 to 10, Mr. Speak-er, is unnecessary. Now, my conversations with industry people says that, you know, for some of the—for many of the companies in Bermuda now, the 25 number is higher, that the average Bermudian company actually has a lower number of standard Bermudians which are in the international business sphere, particularly the ca ptive management company. The CAT 4 companies can probably meet that 25 number pretty easily, most of them. But the smaller captive management firms and others, they have less personnel. That is under-stood. But with the Minister’s power there to vary, based on all the qualitative indicators there is no prob-lem. I think that the 25 number says something about what we would like to achieve, Mr. Speaker, and that this Act has as a high priority, creating Bermudian jobs. By the reduction that the Government proposed, in my view, and our view on this side, it moves away [from that]. It is one of the key things that are being reduced by the Government. That does not send the right message. Keeping the 25, the Minister has a lready the power to vary. This is not a cookie- cutter piece of legislation, as the Minister argued. It is not. It is designed to specifically appeal to each company based on their own profile. That is in the Act. So, the Minister has got the power. Keep it at 25, accept applications, have a policy that allows you to subjectively deal, and exercise that policy strongly. In fact, the Government can come here at some point and say, We have seen a group of companies either stay here, or this here, and this is there, and they have invested this amount of money over a period of time. No matter how many people are in the company, that is going to be a feather in their cap. But moving that number, frankly, Mr. Speaker, sends the wrong message. Oh, well creating jobs for Bermudians is not the priority. It is more important . . . the flip side of this is to attract the business. We on this side do not accept the trickle- down philosophy of economics. That may be the theory that this Government is in bed with. But it is not the one that we ascribe to. Just as with the Bill in the Tourism Authority of which we talked about in the previous de-bate, where about that is an industry that directly cr eates jobs for Bermudians. So, the efforts to accelerate that process, we welcome. It is the same with interna-tional business or with any other business that might House of Assembly
qualify under this Act. So we have difficulty, Mr. Speaker, with the varying of that figure from 25 to 10. We do not believe it sends the [right] message to Bermudians. Let us forget about just the international par tners who might be attracted to it. Because again, g oing back to the figure about the $120,000 reduction down to $25,000, what message are we sending our Bermudians about the value that we put to them in this country? Where the Minister says in his statement that the $120,000 . . . I will go back to it again, It is selling Bermuda. Well, $25,000 is giving Bermuda away! I would have thought that, as Bermudians, they would have seen that Bermuda is a lot more valuable than that. But perhaps I am mistaken. Anyway, M r. Speaker, I am going to move on because time is moving on. Mr. Speaker, I know that, again, there is . . . And I would like to also make another point. When you look at the guidance notes, Mr. Speaker, I have a copy of them here, and I am happy to give them to you as a reference point. But even in the guidance notes, Mr. Speaker, it is very clear what it says about how this provision of the 25 persons works to the number of executives. And I will read it if you will give me permission.
Mr. Walter H. RobanBecause it does not gel with the arguments that the Minister has put for this. It says — [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Walter H. RobanAh, the interpreting is so wo nderful, like Angry Birds. [Laughter]
Mr. Walter H. RobanFor t hose companies, Mr. Speaker, with less than 25 staff, the number will be reduced proportionately. Please note for indicative purposes only —that is key. This is in the guidance notes, which is associated with the actual original Act, of which I assume that the Minister will update and …
For t hose companies, Mr. Speaker, with less than 25 staff, the number will be reduced proportionately. Please note for indicative purposes only —that is key. This is in the guidance notes, which is associated with the actual original Act, of which I assume that the Minister will update and modify if these amendments pass. Please note, but this is what is in the original Act. Please note for indi cative purposes only, the total maximum number of exemptions of senior executives in relation to the number of Bermudian staff could be—could be som ething along these lines, and it gives you a formula of how it works. It is indicative. That means it can be varied. It is not the law. It can be varied. And I would hope that the two Ministers who have to deal with this do wor k together when these qualitative issues arise about companies coming to Bermuda. Yes, vary it! But leave the number as a benchmark. Because it sends the wrong message to reduce it. It says that Bermudians are less than important to this legislation. That is what it says! That keeping the Bermudian threshold high is not as important as discounting the rights to Bermuda to senior executives. That is what it says! It says that. And that is what people are telling us on the doorstep, who have gotten wind of this. I am just asking for some reasonableness in the Government, looking at this. The Minister has the power for all of these issues to vary and have a qual itative approach. The law does not force the Minister to do anything around these standards and benc hmarks. The other thing . . . I will move on, coming closer to the end, Mr. Speaker, is you know, this is turning almost from a Job Makers Act to a Job Takers Act, for Bermudians, in particular, by these changes. And it is the same thing, Mr. Speaker, with the five executives. There is a provision in here, Mr. Speaker, where the five executive work permits [provision] for a company is being removed. And the Minister is being given some sort of discretion. Again, the Minister has a discretion based on the quality of the application, as I outlined in one scenario. Let us just say a company does have . . . Fine. They get there, they do ever ything else. Dot the i’s and cross the t’s in the applic ation. They get the five. But this business plan says, Minister, or Chief Immigration Officer, or whomever he is talking to or she is talking to here in Bermuda, I have another executive who is really talented person. They are central to my team. I really need them here. But they would add six to my company. And this is why. There is a latitude for that person to make the case. You know, I understand why the Government wants to be so ac-commodating to make these changes. But materially, in the current legislative framework, the Government can vary those on the specific applications if qualit ative issues show that this is a good decision. Some of these benchmarks in there, they just send the right message to Bermudians. And that is what I am concerned about around this. Because, you know, I am not likely to be one of these C3 people in my lifetime. Maybe in another lifetime I might become one. But perhaps my daughter will be one at some point, or some of the children of some of the Members on the other side. Right? And perhaps they will under-stand these issues more than I have articulated around them. But I do understand the Bermudian component of this and the feelings that Bermudians have about where we are and where they want to go. But I also understand that, listen, these persons who come here have a comparative advantage. They come here with housing. They come here with jobs. They come here with salaries. They come here with opportunity already strapped to them when they arrive at L. F. Wade International Airport. Most of our Bermudians have to work through those issues just to get in the door of some opportunities that they are pursuing right now. House of Assembly 2258 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
And with the economic situation, Mr. Speaker, it is tougher. So they see these issues arise. And they say, Well, why is the Government going this way? Why does it appear that they are giving preference to that person, and I do not see what they are doing for me by changing these benchmarks? So I would implore the Government to leave the five number in place. In fact, some discussions that I have had say that that is not really a hard issue for some international business people. They under-stand. But I understand why they might want these things moved out of the way. Because, frankly, if I were ABIC and ABIR, I would lobby you all, too, to get this stuff changed. Because that i s what —that is their job. That is what they do. That is their job. I am not going to blame them. They are doing what they are paid to do by their members. It is to move the dial in their direction. But it is your job to think about others in the process. And that is the Bermudian factor. That is your job. And that is my job, too, to remind you of that and to think about that, too. And I am asking you and imploring you to think about those Bermudian factors here and the impression you give with the changes that you are proposing. And frankly, those numbers say something. Those benchmarks say something. The Minister has power to work with these things already in the legislation, in the Immigration Act, in the Economic Development Act. And we un-derstand if the Minister will create a policy where he is going to do certain things to attract business. We understand that. That is your job. But by making the changes you are making tonight with this legislation, you are sending the wrong message. And Honourable Members, I implore you, because not only will you be giving up revenue by the changes with the fee, I think you are giving up some of the confidence that the Bermudian public has employed in you to represent their interests as well as expand opportunity that t hey all desire, along with our international business par tners, who deserve the opportunity to be successful in Bermuda, because their success ultimately is our success. We understand that. But these changes send the wrong message. And I would ask the Government to reconsider. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member Roban. The Chair now recognises the Honourable Member from Devonshire North Central, constituency 13, the Shadow Minister of Economic and Social D evelopment. MP Glenn Blakeney, you have the floor.
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyThank you very much. I am glad I have the floor before falling on the floor. It is late. It has been a long day, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo. I am fine, actually. Do not think . . . Looks are deceiving. [Laughter]
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyOh, I do know that. I do know that, you know. And it is quite entertaining at times, the colourful comments and the body language we see. The Honourable Minister over there running his fingers through his hair, and Shawn Crockwell, the Honourable Member, and also the Honourable Mem-ber Mark …
Oh, I do know that. I do know that, you know. And it is quite entertaining at times, the colourful comments and the body language we see. The Honourable Minister over there running his fingers through his hair, and Shawn Crockwell, the Honourable Member, and also the Honourable Mem-ber Mark Pettingill would do the same thing, but they do not have the follicles. So they have settled for just shining their crowns —the crowns of their heads, that is. But, you know, this is a pretty serious piece of legislation, Mr. Speaker. And it is interesting to see how far the Government is willing to go to try and stimulate a sector of the economy that has, relatively, served the country well. But, you know, it would be remiss of me not to remind whomever is up at this hour listening, including the honourable colleagues in this House, that Governments over the course of time have been extremely flexible and receptive to consul-tative processes, especially with regard to international business and the lobbying groups, ABIR and ABIC and the like. They have co- joined them on a joint venture initiative, year over year, going to RIMS. They have held summits here on- Island. So it cannot be stated or inferred that former Governments, and particularly the most recent former Government, was not open to e ngaging the international business community. This is indeed where this Incentives for Job Makers [Act] all started. It is the attempt now of a Government just to tweak it in a way that they feel is going to better serve the country. And sometimes, we need to be just a little bit careful and reflective, which I suppose is why there is an old adage: Make haste slowly. Now, the Government is looking to, on the one hand, grandfather in the criteria in shifting the el igibility requirement for certain key executives who have been operating in Bermuda to immediately be-come eligible for PRC. Then you have those that would see there is the opportunity in 10 years to be-come eligible and decide to move to the country, bring their key employees. There are a number of questions. Who is going to be considered a key employee? A claims manager? I would think not. I wo uld think not. So it is all relative. So, what is the real motive behind this piece of legislation, is my real concern. I hear what is being House of Assembly
said. And I see what is being written. But what is the motivating factor behind this piece of legislation? The former Government continued to shift as the goalposts shifted with the requests from the international business community surrounding work per-mits versus term limits. The Government, I would not say capitulated, but through a consultative process, agreed there was a merit to the argument to extend one time, to extend again. It went from three to six to nine. And some of the applications for the supposed key employees were not always in line with the think-ing of the Government, as far as those individuals be-ing necessarily key to the operation. But you cannot argue with a corporation that identifies an employee as key. The gardener could be identified as key. A nanny could be identified as key. And with a key executive coming to the Island and now enjoying PRC status, where does it go next? That person is a family of four or five— Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Mr. Speaker, just a point of clarification, if I may.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Honourable Member. Yes. POINT OF CLARIFICATION Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons : Yes. Just because people will be listening to this.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSure. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: There is no way that a gardener would be considered somebody to be exempted from this. It is senior executives. Thanks.
Mr. Glenn A. BlakeneyI understand that. But my premise was, where is it going to go? Where is it going to go? Because you know what? We are between a rock and a hard place. And right now, the international business community understands that they have the leverage to put the pressure on …
I understand that. But my premise was, where is it going to go? Where is it going to go? Because you know what? We are between a rock and a hard place. And right now, the international business community understands that they have the leverage to put the pressure on the Government. They understand that. It is almost like they can dictate terms of engagement unless we hold fast to some principles, especially with Bermudians in mind. Mr. Speaker, when we look at the key exec utives that would be interested in coming to Bermuda and bringing their companies, you know, the interes ting thing is that we do not have, in my opinion, based on this legislation, stop- gap measures. Executives could change. After they have gotten their PRC, the corporate philosophy could change. There could be acquisition. And the new company that takes over could have a whole different view about things and decide they are going to move out of Bermuda. So that key employee who has now got permanent residence status has got the best of both worlds, for $25,000, which for most of the key exec utive-types that we are talking about is but a pittance of what they can really afford for enjoying the kind of st atus that permanent residency would give them, parti cularly senior executives. So, where is the love shown for a country, which everybody understands has the same global challenges with regard to the economy and the current climate that we now experience? That, to me, as a key senior executive, earning seven figures and more, would be really the least of my worries, be-cause I would feel, notwithstanding maybe the wrong perception by the average Bermudian, that it would be incumbent upon me to show a commitment that has some worth in contributing toward the bottom line of the country as a small token of appreciation for the consideration and for the approval of enjoying perm anent resident status. So these are some of the things that make me start to think more political. And whether there is going to be an opening of the floodgates, where there is go-ing to be a hugely significant influx of people that qual-ify for permanent residency, and then there’s this slip-pery slope toward full status after they are here for a while, which gives them the right to become a part of the equation at the polls. That is a major consider ation. Because I think the Government, and any go vernment of this country, would be sensitive to the d egree to ensure the security of tenure for key senior executives. As much as has been said about an exodus of corporations and business and the international bus iness sector, there has not been much mentioned as to some of that cause and effect coming as a result of the global impact of a downturn in the economy. Some of the decisions made with regard to domiciles of choice were not solely based on immigration poli-cies here in Bermuda, not at all. So there is a level of disingenuousness to a degree with regard to the cause of what we have experienced with some of the exodus of companies, and thus the downsizing of the workforce in the international business sector. Even with this being in the pipeline, there co ntinues to be redundancies and downsizing and ou tsourcing. So I do not see, with what is being proposed here, that it will make any significant impact in the short term. I do not see it, unless there is a significant turnaround globally, particularly with the kind of clie ntele we are looking to attract, with the business that they operate to domicile in Bermuda. I do not think it is going to be an overnight thing. This is mainly for the companies that are here who have said, You know what? If we do not get this, there is the possibility we are going to look at other places. Because, remember, we have entities that are subsidiaries in Singapore, maybe in Nassau, maybe in Guernsey, maybe in the Isle of Man. So, we have choices, and we choose to be here. But it is becoming more difficult for us to commit to that choice, because, House of Assembly 2260 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
you know, we are not comfortable. We do not have, in our opinion, the kind of stable confidence that makes us want to commit fully to Bermuda. But, you know what? If we can give you $25,000 as a token of appreciation (as opposed to $120,000) and you give us permanent residency, the whole game could change —just like that. I just do not feel comfortable with that kind of ultimatum. I really do not. I really do not. I always use the coined phrase of “honest brokering, honest br okers” and the principle of that around a table of dipl omatic protocols where there is mutual respect across the table in engaging dialogue through a negotiated process that will try to get you somewhere close to where you want to be as a result of fair compromise. But with the caveats, after this country has served the world so well in every single measure—global catastrophe! Bermuda has played a significant role in settling its commitments based on insurance and asset protection contracts. And now it is almost akin to being nickeled and dimed, to leverage be-cause of the conditions globally that they know hav e impacted our economy, so that they are now pushing the envelope. These Bermudians don’t have no backbone! We can get what we want, and now’s the time! But what about Bermudianisation? What about providing a commitment for the employment of Bermudians? Training? The whole nine yards? There is no real f ocus there. And that is what gets the backs up of Bermudians. Because if it is not well articulated and there is ambiguity as a result of some premature decisions that had to be rescinded, causing that mistrust, we might not be having this conversation. I refer to the attempt to get agreement allo wing students who were children of guest workers to come back and prospect for summer jobs, in compet ition with our university students who have had heck to find summer employment for a number of years! And some of the biggest complaints you will get from graduating students returning to their home is that they cannot find employment. And that did not just start yesterday, last week or last year. We know! B ecause our families and our relatives are dealing with these concerns from the children they have sent to be educated and then come back, not now with bach elor’s degrees, but with master’s degrees! And now having to expend even more in tuition to try to achieve PhDs so they can always be assured when trying to get a job! So, this is what makes a population very apprehensive. This is what makes a population look with suspicion, these kinds of things. And they cannot be denied. They cannot be laughed at. They cannot be ignored. Because these are the same people that you are asking to entrust you at the polls when you, based promises in your platform, that you will do thus, such and so. And you know, one thing that the Government of the day seems to dismiss in probably the deeper recesses of their minds, is the fact that they won by a very slim majority. And a huge and significant part of their success resulted from a number of eligible voters who were either being disenchanted, frustrated or just hurting so much that they did not partake in the pr ocess. And there were some, in my constituency, that were told, You don’t need to vote against Mr. Blake ney. Just don’t vote for him! Well, how do we do that? Don’t turn up at the poll. And it is nothing that is far - fetched, because you remember one of your former leaders was very successful in having a huge, signif icant part of the community that supported the Pr ogressive Labour Party abstain from voting for Inde-pendents, in, I believe, 1995, or somewhere about that. It was a very successful campaign. So, those that could remember said, Hey, you know? I’m hurting right now. I don’t care about what this Government has done with regard to infrastructure, with regard to all kinds of other initiatives that we’ve named time and again and as a manifestation of the work that was done by the former Government. It cannot be denied. They may want to dis - acknowledge it. They may want to throw those curv eballs about the cost of this and the cost of that and all kinds of things. But the achievements are there. The manifestations are there. But at the same time, when people lose their jobs, a part of which resulted from the downturn in the global economy (not just in Bermuda), they become very disenchanted, as we all know. And the Gover nment played on that very, very successfully in their campaign. And as soon as they put the shoulders to the wheel and started introducing some of the initi atives that they had to rescind, such as the one I just mentioned, as well as the one that impacted or was proposed to impact senior citizens regarding their v ehicle class licences, had to be rescinded, this is where the trust element in the minds of the people subjects the Government to being suspect. So, when they bring this type of legislation in, tweaking what the Progressive Labour Party intr oduced, I go, Okay. Well, let’s peel the layers. What is really being attempted here? We hear it is in the inter-ests of the country as a result of what international business executives, senior executives would like. Okay. No problem. But it is $120,000 for that. Hey, well, that’s reasonable. But now, you know, you r educe it to $25,000? Like, well, what is the rationale for that? That $120,000 for someone making seven fig-ures is too much? Really? When the Finance Minister has gone out and secured $300- plus million, $700plus million, as a safety net? I mean, the debt ceiling, he has increased that. That is a safety net. So, if it gets sticky, if it gets tough, he says, You know what? Don’t worry about it. They may have forgotten about that increase, that limit, but now we can go and borrow some more mo nHouse of Assembly
ey and give some short -term stimulus to the economy and make people feel good! So, that insulation, that safety valve, prudent as far as the Finance Minister is concerned because he says the interest rate now is something that he feels comfortable with, because we do not know what could happen in the future and it could be a lot higher if we delayed accessing the kind of capital that he wanted for insulation. So, these are the kinds of things that some of the people in Bermuda are really thinking about. Not everybody is out of their depth with regard to the pol itics and the implications, once they get a handle and their minds wrapped around what some of the cons equences might be, whether they be intended or uni ntended. And that is why there is still a level of discom-fort in the country. There is nobody in this country walking around with, you know, stretched smiles on their faces because of the OBA and its policies, b ecause it is not hitting the people where the rubber meets the road in most instances. So, we on the doorsteps are getting questions, the queries, the comments. Mr. Speaker, you know, we understand that we have challenges in the country. We know that there has to be collaborative effort to address those challenges, all stakeholders on board, all stakeholders included. We certainly support international business. There is no two ways about that. I think the track rec-ord of the Government would support that. And this is evidence of it because it is a Bill that we initially passed. I think I have covered most of what I wanted to cover, Mr. Speaker. And with the hour being late, I am going to end there and allow others to contribute to this debate. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. Is there somebody else who would like to speak? Oh, really? [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Honourable Member from Pe mbroke Central, constituency 17. MP Walton Brown, Shadow Minister of Educ ation, you have the floor.
Mr. Walton BrownThose vexed Bermoothes. But the quote I am going to make from Shakespeare in The Tempest is that, “What’s past is prologue.” “What’s past is prologue.” The past is a dress rehearsal for the present. And, Mr. Speaker, when we look at this particular piece of legislation, this immigration legislation, …
Those vexed Bermoothes. But the quote I am going to make from Shakespeare in The Tempest is that, “What’s past is prologue.” “What’s past is prologue.” The past is a dress rehearsal for the present. And, Mr. Speaker, when we look at this particular piece of legislation, this immigration legislation, we know there is connectivity between the past and t oday. Immigration policy has always been mired in pol itics. It has always been contested terrain. And it r emains so today. If I can go back to the recent past and not the distant past, I will show you this connectivity, Mr. Speaker. In the 1960s, when we were going through our period of democratic transition as the result of people rising up to demand greater rights, we saw an interesting adjustment to the immigration policy. That is right. It was 50 years ago, as the Finance Minister interpolates, Mr. Speaker, 50 years ago. And it res onates today! Because 50 years ago, when we were entering the age of democracy, the old oligarchy who ran Bermuda, the 40 Thieves , devised a policy. They knew that in the age of democracy, where everyone was finally given the right to vote, they needed to ad-dress that issue by amending immigration policy. And so, they made two changes that were very relevant, Mr. Speaker. One, they allowed for any British subject resident in Bermuda for three years or more to get the right to vote. Three years’ resident and they got the right to vote. Mr. Speaker, in addition to this, the Government of the day, which has a direct connection to the current Government, launched a very aggressive immigration policy. If you look at the net immigration figures from 1950 to 1960, it was about 700. I don’t have the exact figures in front of me, but it was about 700. If you look at the net imm igration figures from 1960 to 1970, it was about 8,000. Over 50 per cent of these people who came in the 1960s came from the British Commonwealth. And therefore, every last one of these people who had been here for three years or more was allowed to vote. House of Assembly 2262 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
They had a pertinent impact on elections from the 1960s right up until recently, Mr. Speaker. The right to vote for those nationals ended in 1978, be-cause no further people were allowed to go on the voting register. But all of those who had the vote up to 1978 were allowed to retain that vote. Mr. Speaker, what we see before us today is somewhat more sophisticated than what we saw in the 1960s. But the effect is not dissimilar; nor is the intent. Mr. Speaker, I believe that with this particular piece of legislation the Government has lost its moral compass. I will give greater specificity to that shortly. This legislation, if adopted, will lead to thousands of people being granted PRC status. And while the Mi nister, the Honourable Dr. Gibbons, spoke only about those captains of industry, if you will, when he made his presentation, who would be eligible for PRC st atus, what he did not do is articulate [about] those add itional persons connected to that senior executive who also will be entitled to PRC status —the spouse and the children. So, you can safely say, Mr. Speaker, there is likely, whatever number you have in mind for those who will benefit immediately and in each successive year u nder this adopted law, you can multiple that by three, minimally, minimally. So, Mr. Speaker, I think that represents a dramatic impact on our country. And I want the backbenchers of the OBA Government, which I would now call the One Business Alliance, because nothing that I have seen this year from the Government has been directed at the people to ben efit the people. Everything is about business. I recognise the importance of business. But a government needs to strike a balance. And what we see with this legislation is no balance, no balance. Everything is business focused. For those who sit on the Government bac kbenches, I would ask you to think and reflect very deeply on what you are likely to be supporting tonight. I would ask the Premier to give greater reflection. They may not be here, but I certainly hope they are listening. We already have a situation, Mr. Speaker, where you have Bermudians looking for work, cannot find work. We are going to grant PRC status to these thousands. So what you are going to have is a far more competitive environment, a far more competitive landscape for us to have to deal with. Another consequence, Mr. Speaker, is that you are going to see, because of the rights that are rightly granted to PRC holders . . . If you are a PRC holder, in my view, you should have all the rights of a citizen of this country. Even though, technically, you are not really citizens of this country, you should have all the rights of someone who holds Bermuda status without the right to vote. So, I have no issue with PRC holders being able to buy property at any and all le vels. But by increasing the number by thousands, what you are going to do is increase the price of homes. Now, real estate owners, real estate developers, they are happy. And the Minister used some words just now to express his enthusiastic support for that. I am sure he would not want to repeat the exact words he used.
[Laughter]
Mr. Walton BrownBut, clearly, the Minister of F inance is quite happy. He has the prospect that the prices of property will go up. But guess who will not be happy, Mr. Speaker. The people who are working hard, working men and women who want to buy homes. The Government needs to …
But, clearly, the Minister of F inance is quite happy. He has the prospect that the prices of property will go up. But guess who will not be happy, Mr. Speaker. The people who are working hard, working men and women who want to buy homes. The Government needs to have balance. The Government needs to have balance. There is no balance reflected in this proposed legislation, Mr. Speaker. So, Mr. Speaker, we have been told that these changes have been the result of consultation with the international business community. They clearly say this is all true. They clearly say one thing to PLP Gov ernment officials and something altogether different to OBA officials.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Walton BrownYes. Yes, that may well be true. So, first the demand was for elimination of term limits. That was yesterday. Today the demand is for permanent residency. What, then, does tomorrow hold, Mr. Speaker? I am grateful, at least I should be . . . we should be grateful that …
Yes. Yes, that may well be true. So, first the demand was for elimination of term limits. That was yesterday. Today the demand is for permanent residency. What, then, does tomorrow hold, Mr. Speaker? I am grateful, at least I should be . . . we should be grateful that these international bus iness executives did not make a demand to have five wives because we might be considering legislation for that today.
[Laughter]
Mr. Walton BrownMr. Speaker, simply because someone is making a demand for something, it does not mean you just give in to it. You need to assess that insistence. You need to assess that demand based on competing interests. Governments are sup-posed to multitask. You do not just sit there with zero, …
Mr. Speaker, simply because someone is making a demand for something, it does not mean you just give in to it. You need to assess that insistence. You need to assess that demand based on competing interests. Governments are sup-posed to multitask. You do not just sit there with zero, singular focus and say, Well, this is what the international business needs. They will leave if we do not give them A, B, C or D. So let’s give it to them. And let’s forget about M r. and Mrs. Bermuda struggling to find work, affordable homes. There is no balance, Mr. Speaker. There is no balance. [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Walton BrownDo you hear that, Mr. Speaker, the chirping from the other side? Here we are discus sing an issue of profound significance that is going to alter the shape of this country. And we hear petulant posturing on the other side. Didn’t they build affordable homes? Didn’t they do this? …
Do you hear that, Mr. Speaker, the chirping from the other side? Here we are discus sing an issue of profound significance that is going to alter the shape of this country. And we hear petulant posturing on the other side. Didn’t they build affordable homes? Didn’t they do this? This Government — House of Assembly
this Government —does not have the focus that it should have, that its Honourable Premier said it would have, to address the issues and concerns of Berm udians, not just the One Business Alliance, not just the One Business Alliance, Mr. Speaker.
[Inaudible interjections and crosstalk] [Gavel]
Mr. Walton B rownSo, Mr. Speaker, I fully recognise that governments need to have an environment that is attractive to the growth and development of intern ational business. I do not want to be painted as som eone who stands against the growth of international business . Every government needs to have an …
So, Mr. Speaker, I fully recognise that governments need to have an environment that is attractive to the growth and development of intern ational business. I do not want to be painted as som eone who stands against the growth of international business . Every government needs to have an imm igration policy that addresses a wide range of needs. But what we see here, Mr. Speaker, is piec emeal. I do not know who did the research for your legislation, Mr. Speaker, the Government’s legislation. But most governments in the world— [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Walton BrownOh, let me just respond to that for one second—“It is my Act.” It is not my Act, Mr. Speaker. It is not my Act. I was not part of the PLP Government when it was passed. And I stood in this House a few months ago and told this …
Oh, let me just respond to that for one second—“It is my Act.” It is not my Act, Mr. Speaker. It is not my Act. I was not part of the PLP Government when it was passed. And I stood in this House a few months ago and told this House I was opposed to that Act then as I am opposed to it now. Let us be clear. Let us be very clear. Now, Mr. Speaker, what most governments do is create an immigration policy which says they are going to award a certain number of resident certif icates, or the equivalent, on an annual basis. It is far less than 0.5 of 1 per cent. This Government is not concerned about that. It is concerned about giving the international business community what they tell us, they have said. I do not know that for a fact.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Walton BrownI understand that. You need to listen to my words very carefully, what they tell us the international business community have said. Now, they want to interpret that to mean an ything? That is up to them, Mr. Speaker. But they have come to us, the Government, and told us …
I understand that. You need to listen to my words very carefully, what they tell us the international business community have said. Now, they want to interpret that to mean an ything? That is up to them, Mr. Speaker. But they have come to us, the Government, and told us what the collective voice of international business is. If they were giving testimony in court, that is all they could say. And that is what we would have to listen to. So, why not have a coherent policy, a comprehensive policy that talks about immigration, how many PRC grants we want to issue on an annual ba-sis, and what categories . . . Make it a little bit more democratic and open. That is what most countries do. They do not just give it to the privileged few. They create a framework that is based on some sense of giving dignity and equality of opportunity. But not this Government; they are giving it to one group. Mr. Speaker, the problem that I have with this legislation is the implications. There are profound i mplications in this piece of legislation. In my view, Mr. Speaker, this is social engineering masquerading as economic policy, masquerading as economic strategy. And it can be dismissed. It can be dismissed by the Government. They have the votes to pass any legisl ation they want to in this House. But I am speaking on behalf of those who do not have a voice, who want to be able to buy houses, who are looking for jobs, but do not want to have an additional layer of competition. Now, Mr. Speaker, there was something also very disturbing about this legislation. This legislation will provide benefits to a very select group, dem ographically, because 95 per cent of the beneficiaries of this legislation wi ll be white and male— 95 per cent. Now, it is not for Members of this House to decide whether this is something that was known and understood by the Government when the legislation was fashioned or whether it was merely an unintended consequence. That is for Members to decide. But, Mr. Speaker, we have to remember what Shakespeare said: “What’s past is prologue.” And notions of imm igration, politics, and race have been interconnected since the days of Emancipation in 1834. It is a long history. And it has been a continuous history. Now, I raise that not merely to be provocative, but that is a fact I doubt anyone can discount. I do not raise it merely to be provocative, Mr. Speaker. I raise it because of the potential challenge to this Bill. Let the Government have the courage to pass this Bill, Mr. Speaker. Passing this Bill, though, will raise a very interesting constitutional question. Because if you look at section 12 of the Bermuda Constitution, one could argue that this Bill stands in violation of section 12 of the Bermuda Constitution. Yes, get it out and have a look at it. But let me read it, let me read it, for simplic ity. Mr. Speaker, if you will allow me to read the relevant section of the Constitution?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWhere are you? Where are you?
Mr. Walton BrownSection 12. The Bermuda Const itution Order, Mr. Speaker, says as follows, section 12. And I have left out a few of the sections, just for brev ity’s sake.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerChapter 1, section 12 of the Constit ution?
Mr. Walton BrownSection 12. House of Assembly 2264 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Give your presentation. We found out where you are. You are in [Bermuda Constitution Order 1968] section 12(1), second line.
Mr. Walton Brown“. . . no law shall make any prov ision which is discriminatory either of itself or in its effect.” The effect of this legislation, Mr. Speaker, is to give preferential treatment to a select dem ographic group based on race and gender. So, pass the legisl ation! And we …
“. . . no law shall make any prov ision which is discriminatory either of itself or in its effect.” The effect of this legislation, Mr. Speaker, is to give preferential treatment to a select dem ographic group based on race and gender. So, pass the legisl ation! And we will see what happens with the constit utional challenge. Our Bermuda Constitution Order [at sec tion 12(3)] says, “discriminatory means affording di fferent treatment to different persons . . . whereby pe rsons of one such description are subjected to . . . restrictions . . . or are accorded privileges” —“or are ac corded pri vileges . . . which are not accorded to per sons of a nother such description.”
Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. Point of order.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, yes. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: It is an important point. The Honourable Member, with respect, is mi sleading the House and the country. And the reason that I interpolated and said you have to read it from the beginning is that the section he is …
Yes, yes.
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: It is an important point. The Honourable Member, with respect, is mi sleading the House and the country. And the reason that I interpolated and said you have to read it from the beginning is that the section he is reading from, with great respect he divided in the middle of it. It is common, known law. But he has to read the Preamble to that, which begins [at section 12(1)], “Subject to the provisions of subsections (4), (5) and (8) . . .” which are quite extensi ve. And when you read those, it will say, “where the law in question is already passed.” So there is no constitutional issue with this. This law is already in play, [has] been in play for some time. The provisions of (4), (5) and (8), as you will see, Mr. Speaker, are quite extensive and deal entir ely with the issue that he is trying, with respect, to say would be unconstitutional.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI understand. Thank you. Thank you, Minister. Honourable Member, just continue and conclude that point. Conclude that point.
Mr. Walton BrownI will conclude, Mr. Speaker, surely, Mr. Speaker. Because as much as the Honourable Attorney General is a learned Member of this legislature, Mr. Speaker, it will be a matter for the courts to interpret and not for the Attorney General to do so. So, we can have that discussion …
I will conclude, Mr. Speaker, surely, Mr. Speaker. Because as much as the Honourable Attorney General is a learned Member of this legislature, Mr. Speaker, it will be a matter for the courts to interpret and not for the Attorney General to do so. So, we can have that discussion later. But, Mr. Speaker, I raise this issue because the Honourable Premier, in his opening statement to this House, mentioned that institutional racism was one of the fundamental problems that this country had to address. He was eloquent. He was sincere in his delivery. And yet, what we have before us today is a piece of legislation that will give preferential treatment to a select demographic group. It treats them unfairly, other people unfairly. I think it needs to be challenged. With respect, Mr. Speaker, I would encourage this Government to rise and report progress, because this piece of legislation is an attack on Bermudians, on our children and our grandchildren. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Spe aker: All right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now recognises the Honourable Member of Finance. Minister Bob Richards, you have the floor. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. House of Assembly
Mr. Speaker, I will start off with a reminder, and I will read something from the paper. The first thing I want to say is that this is an amendment to the Incentives to Job Makers Act. Right? It is about job “makers.” Okay? Secondly, I would like to say that this is an amendment to an Act that the former PLP Gover nment promulgated and passed in this Honourable House last year. I find it very interesting that Members, at least one of the Members over there, when I said to him across the floor that, you know, he passed this Act, he is distancing himself from the work of his own party. But we will leave that up to him. Now, if you will allow me, Mr. Speaker, there was an article in today’s Royal Gazette about the ra tings for the banks. And I would just like to read the first paragraph. It is relevant to this.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Go ahead. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It says, “HSBC Bermuda and Butterfield Bank responded yesterday to a ratings cut by Standard & Poor’s, which was concerned about high unemployment, a prolonged real estate downturn and thousands of expatriates leaving the Island.” Mr. Speaker, we have had a lot …
Yes. Go ahead.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It says, “HSBC Bermuda and Butterfield Bank responded yesterday to a ratings cut by Standard & Poor’s, which was concerned about high unemployment, a prolonged real estate downturn and thousands of expatriates leaving the Island.” Mr. Speaker, we have had a lot of political talk here, but not too much reference to economic real ities. One of the biggest problems that we have in Bermuda is a reduction in the population, a very si gnificant reduction in the population. The basic law of economics, Mr. Speaker, what I call the “delta law,” (delta, meaning change) —the change in GDP equals the change in population plus the change in producti vity. If you have a negative change in population, you have to have some sort of huge once- in-100-years increase in productivity to overcome a negative change in population to get a positive GDP growth. That is what this is about. This is about the change in GDP and how it relates to the change in population.
[Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust one second. You need to say something like that. You need to say, “Point of order.” Do you have a point of order or something? You have a point of order? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: You have got to say so, Honourable Member.
Mr. Walton BrownI could be forgiven at this hour, I would hope, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. What is your point of order? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. Walton Br ownThe point of order is that the Honourable Minister is misleading the House. The only valid number on the Bermuda population comes out of the Bermuda census. And if you compare the 2000 census to the 2010 census, there is no real di fference in the resi dential population at …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Carry on, Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, I do not know what world or island that Honourable Member is living in. [Laughter] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I mean, that is the most absur d thing! There are a lot of absurdities that have been …
All right. Carry on, Minister.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, I do not know what world or island that Honourable Member is living in.
[Laughter] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I mean, that is the most absur d thing! There are a lot of absurdities that have been said today. But that is the most absurd thing I have heard today. Now, like I said, Standard & Poor’s, you know, they are not exactly political in Bermuda. It is an inter-national rating agency. They are talking about the thousands of expatriates leaving the Island. This somehow has escaped the Honourable Member. Somehow it has escaped him. So I do not know where he is coming from on that. And I am going to move on from that because that is an absurdity .
Mr. Walton BrownJust for clarification. Because, you know, I take my research very seriously. But [what] this Minister is not saying, Mr. Speaker, is that there was a massive increase in 2006, 2007, 2008, which was abnormal. And then it went back down to levels that were previously the norm. So, you …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Minister, please carry on. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, what is abnormal is that Honourable Member’s judgment of the population changes in Bermuda. That is what is ab-normal. Now, let me say this. [Inaudible interjections] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, this legisl ation is …
All right. Minister, please carry on. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, what is abnormal is that Honourable Member’s judgment of the population changes in Bermuda. That is what is ab-normal. Now, let me say this.
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, this legisl ation is . . . I think one of the Honourable Members who spoke earlier said that this legislation (I think it was the Honourable Member, Mr. Blakeney) is about co mpanies that are already here. And that is true. It is. But House of Assembly 2266 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
let us look at, before I go into something else, let us bring things . . . to use an anecdote that ever ybody is familiar with. Because I think it is important to paint the picture of why we are here with this amendment. And the picture is this: We all know that there is a very large building on Bermudiana Road where the Bermudiana used to be. And there is one that is on Bermudiana Road that is now called O’Hara House. And the one next to it is the ACE Building. Mr. Speaker, the CEOs of those two companies used to be resident in Bermuda. And I remember very clearly when it was announced, firstly, when the CEO of ACE said that he was leaving. And then the CEO of XL said that he was leaving. And everybody, including the Government of the day, swore up and down that it was not going to make any difference to the companies’ presence here and to the Bermuda economy. Mr. Speaker, that was all fronting. That was misinformation. The fact is when the CEOs of those companies left Bermuda they took a whole lot of jobs with them. Because the CEO of a company is the ce ntre of gravity of a company, and when the centre of gravity moves, a lot of other stuff moves with him. One CEO officially went to Switzerland, but he is really somewhere in New York. And the other one is in Con-necticut. And a whole lot of Bermudians lost their jobs because the CEOs of those companies left. And they took jobs with them. They took Bermudian jobs with them.
Mr. Walter H. RobanHe is giving information that suggests that their leaving had something to do with what the Government did. Those companies changed because—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI do not think so. I think he just said that they are leaving. He did not say that they had anything to do with —he did not say the Government. Carry on. Carry on, Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I am saying that, Mr. Speaker, to say that …
I do not think so. I think he just said that they are leaving. He did not say that they had anything to do with —he did not say the Government. Carry on. Carry on, Minister.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I am saying that, Mr. Speaker, to say that there is a connection with people like that to Bermudians and Bermudian jobs. There is a direct, immediate and critical connection between people like that and Bermudians having jobs. That is why the former Government thought it would be very useful to try to do something to, if you like, connect those job makers —this is a job makers Act! —to connect those job makers with this Island. So that if they were connected here, the jobs connected to him would also be connected here. That was the intent. Now, the fact is that we, as an Island and as an economy, have been unsuccessful in connecting many of those jobs to Bermuda. We have not been successful in doing that. And I say that intentionally —
[Inaudible interjections and crosstalk]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust a minute. I cannot hear. It is late at night. So, if it is too much distur bance, it is difficult for me to hear. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSo, Honourable Members. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have not been successful in keeping many of those job makers here. And therefore, jobs have left. And I want to make it clear, because the Honourable Member, Mr. Blakeney, said something that was not correct. It …
So, Honourable Members. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have not been successful in keeping many of those job makers here. And therefore, jobs have left. And I want to make it clear, because the Honourable Member, Mr. Blakeney, said something that was not correct. It is a refrain. I know it is habit - forming. When you say something over and over again, you convince yourself it is true after a w hile. But this has got nothing to do with global recession. Nothing! The reinsurance industry in Bermuda has remained very resilient and in a growth mode—not a fast growth mode, but in a growth mode all during the global recession. All the economic statistics show that, all of it. Now, the fact is that in spite of the fact that the industry has been solid Bermuda has lost employees in that sector. I mean, this comes back to the argu-ments I was making during the election. Particularly, my colleagues will sa y, That sounds familiar. Because those are the arguments we were making during the election that this problem is a Bermuda problem. So, let us not go down that road like before. Bermudians did not buy it in December, and it is not true now. This is a Bermuda problem. And in spite of the fact that the one sector that we have in Bermuda, the foreign exchange earning sector, that is solid . . . We talked about tourism earlier, and I said that it is flirting with extinction. But that is not so with international business. International business is pretty solid. In spite of the fact that it is solid, losses in jobs keep oc-curring. That is the conundrum that we are faced with here, Mr. Speaker. And this is what —this problem is what this Act was supposed to addres s, originally, when the former Finance Minister approached the industry on this matter. It was treated with great e nthusiasm. However, the version of it that came to the floor of this House was very different from what was House of Assembly
discussed at the initial stages. It was watered down. And the industry actually was very, very disappointed, deeply disappointed with the actual Act that was passed here. And one of the reasons we are here now is to try to fix some of those things.
POINT OF CLARIFICATION
Mr. Walter H. RobanPoint of clarification, Mr. Speaker, if I can ask. Which industry is the Honour able Member referring to, specifically? Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWould you like to— Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I thought that it was u nderstood. International business is what I am talking about.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThat is what I thought you were talking about. [Inaudible interjections] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: As opposed to coal mi ning, yes. Mr. Speaker, much reference has been made to the change of the fee from [$120,000] to $25,000. Let us consider what the intention of this Act was …
That is what I thought you were talking about. [Inaudible interjections] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: As opposed to coal mi ning, yes. Mr. Speaker, much reference has been made to the change of the fee from [$120,000] to $25,000. Let us consider what the intention of this Act was su pposed to be. The intention of the Act was supposed to be to help further connect job makers to Bermuda so that they would stay here, and the jobs that they cr eate through a multiplier effect would also stay here. How is that connection going to be made? Well, granting of PRC status was part of it. But there is much more to it than that, Mr. Speaker. This Act was supposed to be a tangible symbol of Bermuda’s welcome- ness to job makers. It was supposed to be an acknowledgement that Bermuda appreciated and valued the contribution that these people made to the Bermuda economy and the society. That is what it was supposed to be, not just PRC status. It was a symbol of appreciation. That is what it is supposed to be. Because I have talked to a lot of these guys around town. Right? And, you know, they want to be a part of us. They want to feel appreciated. They spend a lot of money here. They make a lot of money. Ev erybody has said that a hundred times; it is true. They make a lot of money. But they spent a heck of a lot of money in this country, spent it, given it away, what have you. Right? And they do not mind doing that. But they want to feel appreciated! Just because som ebody is wealthy does not mean they do not want to feel appreciated. They want to feel appreciated. This Act was supposed to be a symbol of that appreciation. When they saw that, in order to get that appreciation, they had to spend $120 grand, it all went. It became, instead of appreciation, it became a transaction. It became a transaction. And the whole [beneficial] feeling of the whole thing disappeared. As a matter of fact, most of the people that I talked to were offended by this fee. Not because they could not afford it. I mean, let us face it. They can af-ford it. They can afford it. Just because people can afford something, it does not mean they do not get offended if you make them pay for something that they think is too much. And that is a human quality, whether you are rich or poor. You do not want to feel that you are being ripped off, even if you can afford to be ripped off. Right?
[Inaudible interjections]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I am hearing this thing about Bermudians are being ripped off. Thank you very much for that comment, Honourable Member. It brings me to my next point. The folks on that side do not understand even the most basic thing about economics, not even the most basic thing! Now, if this $120,000 fee prevents people from staying here, job makers f rom staying here— [Inaudible interjections]
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberYou are as dumb as my head is bald! Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: You are as dumb as my head is bald? Okay. I will go for that.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThat is going to stop! And somebody might want to go home early! Somebody might want to go home before one o’clock in the morning. It is ten to one now. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: You got volunteers? [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSomebody might want to! They are volunteering to go home! Yes. [Laughter] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, if you have a bunch of job makers who get offended by a $120,000 fee, and they take off to some other country, and the Bermudian jobs that are connected to …
Somebody might want to! They are volunteering to go home! Yes.
[Laughter] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, if you have a bunch of job makers who get offended by a $120,000 fee, and they take off to some other country, and the Bermudian jobs that are connected to them disappear from Bermuda, the Government of Berm uda does not get the payroll tax from those Bermudians. It also does not get the payroll tax from the foreigners, who may not be job makers, but still connec ted to those job makers; it does not get that either. When you have the fee too high, that is when you are selli ng Bermuda short! When you have the fee low, that means you are creating value in Berm uHouse of Assembly 2268 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
da! What we are doing here by lowering that fee is to create value in Bermuda! It is just common sense! But, you know, the folks on the other side, Mr. Speak-er, are so caught up in some kind of class thing that they cannot even see their noses on this one! Right? They cannot even see their noses on this one. When you lower this fee, it enables these people to stay. The jobs stay. There is more money in Bermuda. There is more money in the Government. Everybody is happier. Except those folks who, for some reason, think that rich folks did not get nailed for $120 grand.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThat is because the fee is too low! Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I tell you. That fee coul d be $100 and I would still vote for it because it would keep jobs in Bermuda. And the same Bermuda that you all say you represent, our measure is going …
That is because the fee is too low!
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I tell you. That fee coul d be $100 and I would still vote for it because it would keep jobs in Bermuda. And the same Bermuda that you all say you represent, our measure is going to give them jobs, and your measure is not! So I do not care if the fee is $100 or zero. Because I know that, insofar as the Government is concerned, we are going to get more revenue in it by a lower fee, because it is going to help maintain jobs in this country! So, if the Honourable Members on the other side would stop being politicians and just start thinking about what is good for Bermudians and what is good for the Bermudian economy, maybe they can come up with the right answer! But what I have heard so far is just all politics. You know, we got a history lesson from the Honourable Member, Mr. Brown. And that is fine. But, you know, it is not relevant to this. It is not relevant to this at all. So, Mr. Speaker, what we want to do here is, as somebody said earlier, to tweak what was started and to make it more effective. We need to provide incentives for job makers so that we can keep them here. We have a strong international business sector, but we are still losing jobs. Bermuda cannot grow if we lose jobs. The Honourable Member, Mr. Walton Brown, talked about 8,000 jobs coming to Bermuda over a particular decade. Mr. Speaker, I wish we could have 8,000 more people in Bermuda right now. Ber-muda would not be in a recession if we had 8,000 more people! We just would not be in a recession if we had more people! We need more people in this country to grow the economy. You know, we are going to have traffic jams and all kinds of other problems. But that goes with success. A shrinking population is going to pretty much guarantee economic decline, pretty much going to guarantee that. We need more people in Berm uda. And whether it is politically inconvenient for a partic ular party, quite frankly, I do not care where these peo-ple come from. I know that we cannot produce them, as Bermudians, fast enough. We just cannot do it. It is physically impossible, or should I say, biologically impossible. All right? In order to grow the population in Bermuda, we are going to have to bring people in from outside. It is a simple fact! Just face it! We cannot grow this economy and keep kicking people out! Cannot do it. So, let us stop the political posturing and start thinking about what is for the welfare of this economy, what is for the welfare of Bermudians, what is going to put Bermudians back to work. The other side has got to just admit this. We have to bring in more expat riates to provide more jobs for Bermudians. And that is the fact! And you just have to get used to it. You can-not create more jobs for Bermudians without bringing in more expatriates! You cannot do it! You cannot do it.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Well, I hope you are learning the lesson.
[Laughter]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: You cannot do it. So, let us stop this nonsense of saying how, somehow, this particular legislation is going to som ehow replace Bermudians! It just is not realistic. It is all about numbers, Mr. Speaker. And we need more warm bodies in this Island to make the economy grow. Seeing that we are not going to be able to do it in time biologically, the only way we are going to do it is to bring in people from outside. I do not care where they come from, whether they come from the United States, whether they come from E urope, whether they come from the Caribbean, whether they come from Africa, I do not care! But I know one thing, right? We have got to have them. This particular amendment is going to help at least stop the rot, because the rot is still on, Mr. Speaker. The rot is still on. The exodus is still on! We have to stop the exodus before we can bring new people in. Stop the exodus. All right?
[Inaudible in terjections]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Well, this is something else we have to do to do that. Mr. Speaker!
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister, you are doing a good job. Just continue to speak to the Speaker. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Okay. Mr. Speaker, we have to do whatever it takes. This is the philosophy of this group on this side. You know? We are not hung up on these political paradigms …
Minister, you are doing a good job. Just continue to speak to the Speaker.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Okay. Mr. Speaker, we have to do whatever it takes. This is the philosophy of this group on this side. You know? We are not hung up on these political paradigms that they are hung up on. We are pragmatic over on this side. We have to do whatever it takes to turn this thing around. This is one of those things that it takes. The term limit thing was one of those other things that it took. And we will keep doing whatever it takes to get the job done. House of Assembly
So, the other side need to get over this and let us try to produce some more jobs for B ermudians. Thank you.
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Minister. The Chair now will recognise the Honourable Minister without Portfolio, from Southampton East Central, constituency 30. Minister Leah Scott, you have the floor. Hon. Leah K. Scott: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGood morning. Hon. Leah K. Scott: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to be long because I know that it is late. I just want to say a few things. At the risk of also repeating what my colleagues on this side have said, international bus iness actually provides the …
Good morning. Hon. Leah K. Scott: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to be long because I know that it is late. I just want to say a few things. At the risk of also repeating what my colleagues on this side have said, international bus iness actually provides the majority of external rev enue into Bermuda. There has been a steady decline in international business. There has also been a reduction in the recruitment of both Bermudians and expatriates. This Act provides an incentive for the people that create jobs to remain here in Bermuda. It says that we are open for business, we welcome your bus iness, we want you to be here. We want you to keep your business here. And by keeping your business here, you will continue to employ Bermudians. It pr ovides continuity of life for expatriates by providing them the opportunity to have a PRC. And a PRC pr ovides certain benefits. People get nervous when peo-ple have certain benefits in Bermuda that are not Bermudi an, but it does not give them status. But it gives them security and the ability to be able to stay here and to want to continue to keep their businesses here. So, therefore, it provides increased security. It provides residence. It is not a means to acqu ire st atus, and it is not a means to acquire citizenship. We have to stop looking at international bus iness as the big bad wolf and the enemy of this cou ntry, because it is not. And we have all done well under international business. We need to stop viewi ng it as an unwelcome intruder. Our economy is not one that can be sustained solely by our local businesses, and that has been proven. It takes a US dollar to create a Bermuda dollar. Twenty -two members of ABIC generate $1 billion a year to this economy. Should not ABIC and ABIR, the 22 members of ABIC [which] generate a nnually a $1 billion economic impact to Bermuda . . . (Okay, ABIC, ABIR, he says ABIR.) Should not those that are making this contribution to our economy have some sort of security of tenur e and ability to stay here and incentive to continue to want to create jobs for Bermudians, Mr. Speaker? International business helps Bermuda in both its competiveness and its development. Our co mpetiveness depends in a large part on the competive-ness of business that chooses to stay here in Berm uda. As my colleague has said, not only do we need more jobs, but we need more people. We cannot cr eate 3,000 people naturally by birth, so we are going to have to import labour. It is just a fact. We cannot get away from it.
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. Leah K. Scott: Even if our economy stood still, Mr. Speaker, we would still have to bring in people. If there was no further decline in our economy, we would still have to import labour in order to keep this country going. We have to rely on imported labour. This Government is endeavouring to develop policies that will assist and create an environment for job makers to want to be here, to facilitate the emplo yment of Bermudians on an on- going basis, and to a ddress the labour market needs that we have. The decisions that we make can either pos itively or negatively impact our economy and the dec isions of businesses to remain here. This Act is ev idence that the Government is willing to be a true par tner with private business, is willing to take the neces-sary steps to do what it can to stimulate the growth of the economy and to retain Bermudians to be employed. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now recognises the Shadow Minister of Finance, the Honourable Member from Pe mbroke West Central, constituency 18, E. D. G. Burt. You have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, allow me to start by saying that I do not believe that I, or anyone on this side of the House, considers international business as the big bad wolf. I hope that no one on that side of the House [does]. And …
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, allow me to start by saying that I do not believe that I, or anyone on this side of the House, considers international business as the big bad wolf. I hope that no one on that side of the House [does]. And I sincerely hope that nobody in Bermuda considers international business a big bad wolf. As we heard in our last debate, we understand that it is bas ically the one game in town that provides our income. So we understand that. I think that all Members of this House understand that, or else we would not be here. I think that we can dispense with that. The question of what we are deciding is whether or not this Bill is going to speak to and ad-dress the problem, and in some way is this Bill or some measures inside this Bill, necessary? Now, Mr. Speaker, we are going to speak on the objects and I House of Assembly 2270 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
am not going to go too much into detail as the hour is late—
Mr. E. David BurtBut I do want to say this: I think it was very telling when the Minister of Finance said that the rot is still going on. When we have heard that their election, their change of policies will stop the rot, [they] will bring the country back. We are hearing …
But I do want to say this: I think it was very telling when the Minister of Finance said that the rot is still going on. When we have heard that their election, their change of policies will stop the rot, [they] will bring the country back. We are hearing [about the] turnaround. We are hearing the things . . . we hear lots of things about things turning around, we are seeing positive signs, incorporations are up, et cetera. And then he says that the rot is still going on. What that implies, Mr. Speaker, is that it is not just about Government policy; it is not just about who is in charge of Government. Term limits are not going to stop this rot (as we hear). We have to also acknowledge that some part of this is about the changing global dynamics and where growth is and where Bermuda is positioned. We have to bring in new business, and it is not so much that the mature industries are going to be able to sustain us. I think that that is clear. We cannot say that the complete (I guess you could say) exodus of jobs that has taken place is sol ely due to Government policy. We also have to acknowledge that there is a measure of it there that deals with changing global dynamics, that deals with outsourcing, that deals with the fishing season, that deals with responding to the markets that deliver a value for shareholders, costs of living in various loc ations, et cetera. It is not just about whether or not we set a value at five people maximum or $120,000 ver-sus $25,000. There are lots of things that fall into place. So I happy that the Minister of Finance says that the rot is still going on, because he also will now understand, and he has made it clear, that there is a lot of work that remains to be done, and saying that term limits this, or job makers that, is not going to fix the problem. It is a lot deeper than the One Bermuda Alliance b ecoming the Government, because, as we have heard tonight, the rot is still going on.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThey have not led us to the promised land yet.
Mr. E. David BurtNow, Mr. Speaker, I have a few questions, right at the top, for the Minister, and I hope that he can answer them when he gives his response.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI hope he is going to be able to give it after you finish speaking. Mr. E. David Burt: I am not so sure about that, Mr. Speaker. The first thing is: Insofar as the companies that have applied for the exemptions, or to be class ified or ready for …
I hope he is going to be able to give it after you finish speaking. Mr. E. David Burt: I am not so sure about that, Mr. Speaker. The first thing is: Insofar as the companies that have applied for the exemptions, or to be class ified or ready for the exemptions, could he tell me how many companies have applied, first of all? How many companies that have applied have been denied or rejected? How many companies have been approved? Those are the three questions. I would like to get some understanding of that because I think that that will help us when we move to our next stage of debate. So, again, that is: How many companies have applied? How many companies have been rejected? And how many companies have been approved? Next is that the Minister spoke about ABIR [Association of Bermuda Insurers and Reinsurers] . And we also heard the other Minister speak about ABIR, Minister Scott. There are 21 companies in ABIR and this Act was largely targeted toward that group. [I would like to ask him] if he could possibly supply to me . . . I know it is asking a lot of specific questions and I know it is late, so I am asking a lot of, I guess I could say, the civil servants who have been working a very long, hard day on the day of their furlough paycheques. Can he, please, get the information as to how many of those companies are part of the current list that currently enjoy those exemptions? We understand that the original Incentives for Job Makers [Act] was targeted particularly toward the ABIR -class companies, the Class 4 and Class 3 reinsurers, the big ones. We would like to know how many of those companies, you know, the big group, are qualified under the exemptions which have been granted thus far. We know that there are a significant number of companies that have applied under the I ncentives for Job Makers that are currently receiving work permit exemptions for their staff, and have gone through the process and received that information. And then, finally, because I think this is key for the debate, is, How does the Minister define “senior executives”? Because I understand when we put forth this Bill, we referred to senior executives as “C” lev-el—chief risk officer, chief financial officer, chief operating officer, chief executive officer —C-suite. That is what we thought. But we have heard different defin itions of senior executives today. We have heard senior vice president of claims, et cetera. So, I mean, there is a big definition, and the law in no place spec ifies what a “senior executive” is. That is up to the di scretion of the Minister. So I think that it [needs to be] very clear. I do not think it is helpful to describe, but I think that the people should know what the Minister is going to use [to make that determination].There are guidelines. However, Mr. Speaker, there are no reg ulations. So these things are not published so we cannot actually say, Well, the Minister will consider this. The Minister will consider that. House of Assembly
And that moves to the next thing. Will the Minister, when he makes his new guidelines, publish those guidelines? And that is an increased level of transparency and that, I will say, probably was not there before. But it will be a question. Will he publish those guidelines? I think that that will be it. Now, just to move on to one final issue as the Shadow Minister of Finance, and I think that my MP Walton Brown said it best, when we were talking about housing. I do believe that the only people in this country, Mr. Speaker, who think that the price of hous-ing is too low, are the Members on the other side. B ecause I know that there are many members in my constituency that are still saving to purchase property. And there are lots of people that have challenges that purchase property. So w hen we hear that property values may go up and some people on the other side are excited about that, we also have to remember that there are a lot of people who are still looking to get on the first rung of the property ladder. And there are a lot of peopl e, with the declining housing prices over the last few years that have been able to enter the housing ladder. I think that this is a good thing, so we have to look at the balance and remember who it is that we are looking out for. Now, Mr. Speaker, there are a few things that the Bill covers, and going from the Minister’s brief, you know, there is the implementation date (I think that my honourable colleague covered that so I do not need to go any further), the reduction of fee (I do not want to basically elaborate on the arguments that have been made because I do think that the Shadow Minister for Home Affairs covered it very well). But I do have this challenge in that the Minister said that they are going to add something in that is going to talk about ne eding to qualify the restrictions on companies by saying it is subject to the availability of suitably qualified Berm udians. Now, I want to say again, Mr. Speaker, and this is why I asked the Minister if he could tell us how many companies have been denied under the current guidelines, because he is adding things in, or he is proposing to add in things which are going to weaken the current guidelines, or add qualifiers to the current guidelines. In my view, Mr. Speaker, I do not think it is a far [stretch to] ask, when you are going to start exempting companies from work permit requirements for their staff, and especially now that the Minister is b asically saying that we are going to take off the statut ory limit of a maximum of five, and say that many peo-ple can be exempt from Part V [of the Immigration Act], as the Minister decides, I do not think it is that far of a stretch, Mr. Speaker, to ask, to expect, those companies to have Bermudians at all levels of their company. I do not think that is too far of a stretch because I do believe that demonstrates that that compa-ny is committed to Bermudians. And those are the types of companies, Mr. Speaker, [about which] we should say, You know what? You are committed. We have no issue because you are the type of corporate citizen that we want doing this. But then we are going to add in qualifiers? Well, they can say, Oh, we didn’t find any Bermudians. We know how that one goes, Mr. Speaker. We know how that one goes! I know that you have sat in the chair of Home Affairs before, Mr. Speaker, so you have seen all those.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. E. David BurtThat is it. So I think that that, Mr. Speaker, is definitely a challenge. I do not understand why the Minister feels the need to add that in. So I am hoping that he can elaborate on that, because it does not make any sense. We have already had a …
That is it. So I think that that, Mr. Speaker, is definitely a challenge. I do not understand why the Minister feels the need to add that in. So I am hoping that he can elaborate on that, because it does not make any sense. We have already had a number of companies that have qualified for this, and I think that a company demonstrates its commitment to Bermuda by this. So I do not understand the reason to water down the r equirements. I do not believe that that is going to be the determination for a company saying, You know what? We do not want to stay here. I do not think that that is it. So I do not believe that we should water down the requirements because I believe that we want companies in Bermuda that are good corporate citizens, good corporate citizens. Now, Mr. Speaker, moving on to the next to pic, which the Minister covered in his brief: He spoke about the relaxation or the reduction of numbers from 25 to 10. Once again, it is another relaxation of the items or the thresholds that were in the original Bill. Now, Mr. Speaker, I have a big problem with this. I want to refer, because the Minister did state, he did admit, and we have heard from other speakers on this side, that the Minister has discretion to lower that number. Now here is the thing, Mr. Speaker. What I find interesting is that the Minister in his brief said, and I quote, “the message has been sent that this will only be for exceptional circumstances.” Now, as the Shad-ow Minister of Home Affairs said, and I too will say right now, Mr. Speaker, I take issue with that stat ement. The reason why I take issue with that statement is, number one, the Act makes it very clear; and number two, I am certain that this has been waived in some of the applications. And number three, it is my understanding that the guidelines that were produced, that basically stated what you had to do and how many Bermudians you have to have qualify in order to apply for exemptions, were sent out to all the companies. So I do not understand how the Minister can get up and say that this message has been sent, that this will be only for exceptional circumstances, when we had guidelines that were sent out to companies that basi cally said, If you have between one and five House of Assembly 2272 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Bermudians, you can get one exemption. [Between] six and ten, two exemptions, et cetera . So I am trying to figure out, Mr. Speaker, why the Minister said that. And I hope that he can give some clarity because I think that the guidelines were sent to everyone and everyone could see what they are. Now—
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. E. David BurtYes, exactly. Sorry. Now, the Minister has the power to vary this number, as we see in the guidelines that are currently in existence. So what is the reason for lowering the threshold? I do believe, as the Shadow Minister of Home Affairs said, it sends the wrong message. We …
Yes, exactly. Sorry. Now, the Minister has the power to vary this number, as we see in the guidelines that are currently in existence. So what is the reason for lowering the threshold? I do believe, as the Shadow Minister of Home Affairs said, it sends the wrong message. We want companies that are committed to Bermudians. We want them and we need to make sure . . . if w e are looking for them to increase their headcount, then we need to make sure that we provide a scale for them to go ahead and increase their headcount to apply and be eligible for more exemptions. But that, Mr. Speaker, moves me to the next issue and that is this whole removal of the statutory limit. Now, under the existing Incentives for Job Makers Bill, we have a maximum of five people that can be exempt from Part V of the Immigration Act. Now, Part V of the Immigration Act covers work permits and the permission to reside if you are working in the I sland. To be exempt from that means that there is no advertising for the position, that that person is exempt, they are here as long as the company wishes to keep them here. We put that in place; we are fine with that, Mr. Speaker. At least I am fine with that. The challenge, Mr. Speaker, [is] that we are now removing this limit from [Part] V and saying it could be as many as the Minister wants. Now, I am going to say this, Mr. Speaker, because we heard a l ot about ABIC [Association of Bermuda International Companies] and we heard about ABIR, and we heard about Bermuda First, and different things like that, and the Minister said that the companies may need more. This goes back to my question that I had before, Mr. Speaker. How many senior executives does a company have? What is the number? What is the cap? Because, clearly, we are going past “C” level. How many senior executives does a company have? When we are talking about exemption from work permits, the Minister gave an example of vice president for claims. Now, I do not happen to believe that the vice president for claims is a senior executive, but if he feels he is a senior executive, that is okay. I can understand how he would like to say, you know, maybe that is for a position to be in Bermuda, to keep there, I can understand that, Mr. Speaker. But I will argue that the outsourcing and other things, there are positions, such as claims, that may move to lower cost jurisdictions. But here is the thing, Mr. Speaker. If that vice president of claims decides to move to another com-pany, and that company feels that they want to bring someone else in, they do not have to apply for that position. They do not have to advertise for it. They can say, You know what? We are going to use that thing because we have an unlimited number now —because it is not just five; we can have up to 20 or 25. We are going to say that this person that we are bringing in is exempt from work permits. And there could be a Bermudian in another company who is absolutely qual ified, who may want to change from the thing, but will not have that opportunity to move because that pos ition will not be advertised. These are things that could happen, Mr. Speaker, and that is why I have a cha llenge wi th removing the limit of five persons. I will go further into that because we have also had discussions with alphabet soup groups, and I am trying to figure out where the question of that thres hold came from, so I am going to ask the Minister. Did it come from ABIR? Did ABIR say they wanted more? Because ABIC seems to be fine with the limit. B ecause ABIC are like, you know, We have smaller companies. We don’t think we will need more than five, et cetera. Have you had issues with ABIR companies saying that they want more? I think that we should have that type of clarity, because it is also my understanding that ABIR companies have lots of different companies and they can, I don’t want to say play around with the numbers, but they can get a lot, because, you know, different things, you know, ACE Tempest Re, ACE Re, differ-ent things like that. All right. So I would like to find out what are his guidelines for this? What is he going to issue for this? If this Bill passes this evening, and this amendment passes this evening, what guidelines is he going to put in place? Because he seemed to indicate that he is g oing to remove the threshold of five and the Act makes it unlimited. I mean, not even a maximum of 10 to try and put it . . . No! Just completely unlimited and at the discretion of the Minister with no regulations whats oever, so it can be done by guidelines that are in exis tence and they can go through. I think that that is an unacceptable level of . . . I do not want to say risk, but I think that that is an unacceptable level of discretion, something that does not come to this House, and I think that we should actually try to find out what guidelines the Minister will be going by when he does that. Now, Mr. Speaker, I will move on to the el ephant in the room, because we are all discussing this. So I am going to ask the Minister, I do not necessarily want to go to a hypothetical question, so I am not going to call it that, but —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThat will not be allowed anyway.
Mr. E. David BurtWhat happens, Mr. Speaker, when ABIR says their members do not feel welcome with House of Assembly the PRC and they are going to leave and go to anot her company because we will not give them citizenship? What happens then? [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. E. David BurtWhat happens then? And I think that this was the point that the Honourable Member from constituency 17 was making. It is the thing about we can continue to give and continue to give and continue to give. And I have this challenge, Mr. Speaker, because we know that there …
What happens then? And I think that this was the point that the Honourable Member from constituency 17 was making. It is the thing about we can continue to give and continue to give and continue to give. And I have this challenge, Mr. Speaker, because we know that there have been some people that have said that PRCs are second- class residents, or second- class citizens, and we have heard of people like Kevin Comeau, who said he voted with his feet and he left because a PRC was not good enough for him. What happens when the PRC is not good enough for the ABIR representatives? When is it going to be time when they are saying, You know what? We are not feeling welcome yet. Now, Mr. Speaker, we know where the ind ividuals on that side, the Honourable Members on that side of the House, are because 13 of the 19 of them who sit over there ran under the United Bermuda party in 2007 and they ran under a platform that said that they, you know, [were] looking to grant status to per-manent residents. So we know where they are. We know when the Honourable Shadow Minister of Home Affairs slipped up and said “status,” we heard interp olation from the other side saying, We can add that in if you like. We know what their ultimate goal is. I guess the question is, Mr. Speaker, if the Minister for Ec onomic Development, who was one of those 13 cand idates, would state under what conditions would he consider bringing to this House the ability to give se nior executives status should they ask for it? I think that that is important, Mr. Speaker, because in the exact same way that we got ourselves into the long- term residents issue, and what brought on term limits, was the fact that there was this large amount of people who were uncomfortable with their status, and we are creating another potential large amount of people who may be uncomfortable with their status. So we need to be very careful, Mr. Speaker, and I hope that the Mi nister will answer that question when he responds. I am going to echo my MP, Walton Brown, one more time and say that it is my belief that the backbenchers on that side of the House—especially the ones in marginal seats —need to think long and hard about their vote on this tonight, Mr. Speaker. I understand the arguments that have been made, and I can agree with the Minister of Finance that we have to make sure that we take action to maintain compa-nies here. But I think that this . . . and there are some things in this Bill that I can support, and, as we have said before, our leader has called on the Government to use the tools which are inside the Incentives for Job Makers. But we do not believe that the watering down of the protections that were put inside this Bill are the best thing for Bermuda and the best thing for Berm udians. We would hope that the Members on this side would understand our concerns and would take some of them on board and at least, at the very minimum, inside of the guidelines which they publish, understand the concerns which we have expressed, make them public, and make it clear for Bermudians who may be fearful of what this may bring, that it is not go-ing to lead to that result. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now recognises the Deputy Speaker, from constituency 4.
Mrs. Suzann Roberts -HolshouserThank you, Mr. Speaker, and good morning. And not only am I from constituency 4, I also represent a “marginal.” I also represent one of the 13.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou represent my constituency.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMake sure they know that you are my MP. Okay? [Laughter]
Mrs. Suzann Roberts -HolshouserAnd [from] wor king with the people, Mr. Speaker, we understand that we have to go door to door. We also have to handle issues with individuals within our constituencies, and for most of us, [from] across the Island. And I think it is fair to say that I can …
And [from] wor king with the people, Mr. Speaker, we understand that we have to go door to door. We also have to handle issues with individuals within our constituencies, and for most of us, [from] across the Island. And I think it is fair to say that I can certainly say that I am standing to my feet today in support of this job- making incentive because there are many people in my “marginal” con-stituency that do not have a job. And, as a result, it is imperative that we actually do something and not just say something. We . . . this incentive, and that is exactly what it is called, Incentives for Job Makers, is exactly what it is. Mr. Speaker, as a mother I will do whatever I can in my power and in my ability to protect my child and my children. And it is almost a [maternal] instinct to want to be able to improve the lives of my fellow Bermudians, all of us. So I have to take away any sel fish interests that I might consider this legislation might have. You know, What will it do? Are we going to be giving away more for non- Bermudians by giving them House of Assembly 2274 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
PRCs? But the reality of it is, and I heard the sentence, This is a trickle -down. But I want to say to that Member who made that statement, this is not about trickle -down. This is about multiplying. It is about ad ding the dots. Let me tell you that the dots, in my mind and in my constituents’ minds would be. If we do not do something about an incentive, if we do not step forward and do something that other countries may not be offering, because we know that we have to offer an incentive to get t hat business here, then we have got to do that. But what it means if we do not do som ething, it means, dot, no business. It means no jobs. It means no ability to pay your rent. It means no ability to pay your mortgage. It means no ability to live like a human being in your own country. It is important to understand that this jobmaking incentive is just that. It is the ability to encour-age companies to relocate or companies to stay, as an incentive. So, therefore, we have got this multipl ying effect where they hire staff that are Bermudian. That individual may go to a restaurant. That means that restaurant may keep their doors open. It means a print firm who prints their menus keeps an individual in that profession. It means that we start looking at this increase in jobs that we have asked for, that we act ually have a potential to do something to help. Mr. Speaker, if you do not mind, I took the initiative, because I was not sitting in the House when the initial Incentives for Job Makers was brought, so I took a quick look at the introduction. Do you mind if I read just a small portion of it, which I thought was r eally, really interesting?
[Inaudible interjections]
Mrs. Suzann Roberts -HolshouserOf the original . . . it is not even . . . it is the presentation. It is not even of the original Bill.
Mrs. Suzann Roberts -HolshouserThank you. It was said, and again, I will just read two small portions in here, if you do not mind, Mr. Speaker. “Honourable Members will remember that in my National Budget Statement I made the statement that (and I quote), Honourable Members will reme mber that in my National …
Thank you. It was said, and again, I will just read two small portions in here, if you do not mind, Mr. Speaker. “Honourable Members will remember that in my National Budget Statement I made the statement that (and I quote), Honourable Members will reme mber that in my National Budget Statement I made the statement that (and I quote), ‘To meet the labour challenge, the Government is exploring incentives to be nefit the “job makers” —individuals who are proposing or already demonstrating a significant presence in Bermuda, are employing Bermudians, and creating entry -level employment opportunities for young Bermudians.’” Here we see clearly what the intention of the Incentives for Job Makers was. We, as a Government, acknowledged that we have to go one step further and, indeed, we are trying to do that. And before I close, I would like to read the closing portion of this statement. “Mr. Deputy Speaker,” (and I do believe you were the Deputy Speaker at the time) “a number of island nations of comparable size to us have offered permanent residence, and even passports, for a very high price. We do not intend to follow this strategy.” There was a question—“we do not intend to follow this strategy.” So the point is that it was understood at that point that we are going to have to— we, as lawmakers, we as Bermudians, are going to have to—do what we feel is right to encourage through incentives, to be one step ahead of our competitors. And our competitors are real. They are there. They are taking away the possibility of our Island getting bigger and healthier, stronger with individuals having jobs. So, Mr. Speaker, with that I say, I am very pleased to have had the opportunity to stand to my feet . . . disappointed when I heard statements such as, Ninety -five per cent of the beneficiaries will be white and male. I do take offence to that statement because we are failing to acknowledge the beneficiaries of those individuals who have jobs or will get a job, who have not been employed for two years. They are going to be the benefactors, Mr. Speaker. And, with that, I take my seat.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Honourable Minister of Health and Se niors, Minister Patricia Gordon -Pamplin, has the floor. 2 Official Hansard Report , 8 July 2011, page 2162 House of Assembly Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I intend to be very brief on …
Thank you, Honourable Member. The Honourable Minister of Health and Se niors, Minister Patricia Gordon -Pamplin, has the floor.
2 Official Hansard Report , 8 July 2011, page 2162 House of Assembly
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I intend to be very brief on this. Let me just say, that the approach and att itude that I have heard tonight coming from the Oppo-sition benches reminds me very clearly of two days ago when I listened to the television and I s aw Sen ator Cruz, the Republican tea party senator, who stood for 23- plus hours on the floor of the Senate with noise because he is anti -Obama. He did not care what he said. He actually sat and read Green Eggs and Ham, as a bedtime story to his children, at some point in time during his present ation. And this is kind of the feeling that I get here. That is almost the Members of the Opposition who seem to want us as the Government to fail. They do not want for us to be able to create jobs for people. Why? B ecause it puts a spanner in the works of the rhetoric that they have espoused on their side of the aisle to try to stir the emotions of our Bermudian people that the OBA Government has no interest in them, and our only concern is for those white people, those business people, those rich guys. We heard the Honourable Member Walton Brown when he gave his presentation indicate— [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: —the Honourable Member —that, as my honourable colleague just alluded to again, the beneficiaries of this particular le gislation will be all white and male, that those are the ones who will be able to get these exemptions under the Job Makers Act. Now, let me just say that as a parent, when the money spent to educate my children comes to hundreds, certainly tens of thousands, and in [some] instances, hundreds of thousands of dollars, I do not care if the person who is in the position to give my child, or our children, a job is white and male. I do not care if he is green with polka dots. If our people can be put to work because these job makers . . . job makers have entrenched themselves within our community to the extent that they feel comfortable, they feel like they belong and they want to be able to co ntribute to our economy, and ensure that our people are put to work, do I care what colour they are? No, I do not. And I do not apologise for that. The other thing, the common thread (as I heard on the other side), All you people in these marginal constituencies . . . One of these days, Mr. Speaker, I only hope that we stand in this Honourable House and recognise that our responsibility is not to do things that are going to get us the next vote. It is to create policies that are going to benefit the public at large. And to hell with whether or not we get elected next time. Because if —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, now, please— Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Oh, I am sorry. I am sorry.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe language. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I was getting a little . . . I was getting a little —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe language. Yes. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I apologise. I was a little passionate about that. The Speaker: Yes. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I do apologise. I withdraw that statement.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberYou are doing the same thing now. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Forget about whether we get elected next time or not. Let’s look at if this motion that we are having on the floor, as we speak will generate jobs, knowing that we cannot create the numbers of bodies …
You are doing the same thing now.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Forget about whether we get elected next time or not. Let’s look at if this motion that we are having on the floor, as we speak will generate jobs, knowing that we cannot create the numbers of bodies that we need to be able to create a more robust economy, to be able to put money in the Government coffers through the levying of taxes, in whichever way they come. We cannot create the 3,000 or 4,000 people that we need right now. We have to be able to ensure that we have these jobs here. So along with the people who we have who are unemployed, that we want to be employed, and along with those others who will come in, because the Job Makers who are the ones who will have these exemptions . . . not every person works for exempt companies, so let us not get caught up in that rhetoric. Let’s ensure that we recognise who this is intended to target. It is those people, the senior executives who will be able to get this benefit and by their presence they will be able to create jobs for those Bermudians who do not have them, for some of those other mid-level people who may also have to come in. But once they come into the country, as my honourable colleague, Suzann Roberts -Holshouser indicated, the Deputy Speaker, about the multiplier effect, that is exactly what we get. Because when people are here and we are able to have people em-ployed, there is money in the coffers. There is money coming in for taxation. There is money going to people who rent houses. These are the kinds of things. I understand the frustrations, and I certainly understand when Members stand and protect be-cause we all want to protect Bermudians, and to pr otect the positions in which we find ourselves. But if we have no jobs, if there are no jobs to offer, and if this Government has not created the conducive enviro nment for jobs to be created, then we will have failed. House of Assembly 2276 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
And we have to look past whether or not our actions are going to get us elected the next time around. Now, what happened with the original Incentives for Job Makers Act? Because when the PLP Government brought that Act into creation, Mr. Speaker, it was done in recognition of some of the drain that was happening and the attempt to stop that drain of people leaving the country because they felt uncomfortable. So there was a consultation process. And during that consultation process, the to and fro, and the negotiations that occurred were such that the senior executives went away with a certain level of expectation and under standing of what they believed to be the agreement between them and the then - Government. And what happened? The Bill came to this House. It was so watered down that those who were on the opposite end or in the mix with respect to the negotiations did not recognise that what the legislation showed was in fact what they thought they had negotiated. So they were like . . . they felt betrayed. And that was the word that was used by executives at that point in time. They felt betrayed. Now, we as a Government have a responsibi lity to be honest brokers when it comes to our negoti ations with our partners. And with that partnership that we are expecting for them to fulfil their part [of], we have to fulfil our part by ensuring that our people are educated to be able to eligible for the jobs that are being advertised. We get that. And Lord knows, many of us, as parents, have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on our children. I know many of us probably look at our bank accounts and think, Maybe somewhere, when I look at what is not there, maybe there is a certificate coming to say that my child is now a brain surgeon, when you think of how much money you have spent. But with that said, we put great effort and sacrifice into the ed-ucation of our children. And for them to come back to our country and we hear them with one of two options. One says, I don’t want to be here because I can’t find work. The other says, I am here but I can’t help, so I am frustrated. And then as a result I make choices that cause me to become anti -social. That is a failure on us as legislators, if we cannot produce an environment and create an envi-ronment that assists in alleviating that level of frustr ation for our college students who have come home from school; for our young people who are coming into the job market; for our people who have worked their entire lives and find themselves on the out. And certainly when they do not have jobs, the challenge of the Ministry with which I have responsibi lity is that we start to see people who do not have health care, cannot afford it. And what happens then? They waltz into the hospital, the emergency depar tment, when there are issues because they do not have money and they cannot be turned away. And before you know it, we end up with accounts rec eiva-ble. We end up with a rising cost of health care b ecause somebody has got to find the balancing act in order to be able to know that there is money coming in to pay for bad debts, when people do not have the basic necessities of life. So if I have to sit here and say that I am pr epared to allow 10 or 15 senior executives (whatever the number is), and the Minister has the discretion . . . and the lead Minister representing this Bill tonight will give the wrap and give a little more detail to, and an-swer some of the questions (it is not my intent to do that at this point in time). But if I have to stand and support an Act that says that as a result of what we do, we are going to put our people back to work, and if that movement that I make, if that action that I take results in the fact that nobody wants to vote for me for the next election, so be it! So be it! Because our focus needs not to be on this seat in which we seat. It does not belong to us. These seats on which we sit belong to the people of thi s country. We owe them a debt to ensure that we e nhance the quality of their lives, and we want to make sure that we fulfil that obligation from this side of the aisle, in our country; [that] we do not have a parent looking a child in the eye and saying, I don’t have food to put on the table because I have not been able to work, and as a result we do not know how we are go-ing to eat. While that may seem to be extreme, those are the situations that we are finding. I know that as Members are canvassing, I will guarantee that som ewhere along the way during their canvassing exper iences they have found somebody who does not have the Mr. Speaker, to ensure that we do not have pe ople going hungry in our country; [that] we do not have the frustrations money to put food on the table in this society. As I said, Mr. Speaker (and I will end on this note), if by taking this action we create jobs because we brought people into this country, and if I have to look in the eyes of the next person who passes me on the street as I did, probably about three weeks ago . . . I was walking past the post office. This lady [was] driving by in the car. [I] did not know who she was. I said hello, because I just say hello to everybody. And all I heard coming out of that car was a voice sa ying, Where’s all de jobs? That was exactly the question that I was asked. That said to me that there is somebody who is frustrated, that they have yet to be able to find em-ployment. We have to be able to go down those paths and try whatever we will. Not to satisfy some white male, rich guy, whether he can afford $120,000 or $25,000. That is not our aim. Our aim is that once sat-isfied, those people will feel a connection, a sense of belonging, and an obligation to carry their load within our community to make sure they put our people back to work. House of Assembly
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. Does any other Honourable Member . . . the chair recognises the Honourable Premier. Premier Cannonier, you have the floor. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Honourable Member, Minister Crockwell, wanted to close his session down early so I did not get the …
Thank you, Honourable Member. Does any other Honourable Member . . . the chair recognises the Honourable Premier. Premier Cannonier, you have the floor.
Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Honourable Member, Minister Crockwell, wanted to close his session down early so I did not get the opportunity, I obliged him. But I will not let this one pass, this Job Makers Act, without speaking to it. There was a question that was asked, Mr. Speaker, earlier by an Honourable Member and it says, What is the motivation of this Act? I want to set a picture of reality of where we are today. And I know that Members did not want to hear this urgency of now—
[Laughter]
Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: But, you know what? Let’s set the picture of the reality of where we are today: No hotels being built; unemployment continuing to rise; departure of expatriates by the thousands; Bermudians emigrating. So what is the motivation? When I open up the paper 3 and I look at it, the very first article says, “Citing the departure of thousands of expatr iates, unemployment as high as 12 per cent, and a sharp and extended slowdown in the property market,” [the standing] of banks in Bermuda has been lowered. I heard Members in this House, Mr. Speaker, talk to the fact that this is going to affect property va lues, that they are going to go up. I think we need a reality check here. For most of us, Bermuda has experienced one of the healthiest middle classes in the world because of property values, and has allowed us as a country to prosper. And when we look at articles that say thousands of expatriates have left the Island, let me put some more reality to this here. Let’s just say 2,000 expatriates have left. We know it is more than that. And let’s just say, Mr. Speaker, that they have spent on an average, on a weekly basis, about $1,500 a week. That is rent, elec-tricity, groceries —we know it is way more than that, but I am using a very low figure here. Two thousand expatriates at $1,500 a week is $3 million that has gone out of the economy in a week —every single week. Multiply that by 52! That is $156 million annua lly out of this economy —gone! Because we do not know how to be competitive! Simple! Just do not know how to be competitive. Now, I am not going to go and blame anyone else—UBP, PLP—I am not blaming anyone as to why they left. The fact is that that have gone. And the 3 The Royal Gazette , 27 September 2013. question is, What are we going to do about it as a country? And this Government knows that it needs to lay fertile ground for businesses to grow to get our people back to work. Our young people are getting educated and they are looking at Bermuda and sa ying, Why should I come back? The investor is looking at Bermuda and sayi ng, Why should I invest in Be rmuda? And we sit in this House going back and forth, and over and over, extending and missing the wi ndows of opportunity to get our people back to work and have millions of dollars circulating in this econo-my. Seniors are growing the population. And the birth-rate is low. In fact, we are dying faster than we are being born. We do not have enough people here to sustain our standard of living. And we are going to get up here and say some of the things that I am hear-ing? Let’s get competitive! We are in a global economy fighting . . . we are not fighting the Caribbean. We sail with the big boys and we are competing against that. So let’s start competing. Do what we need to do to compete. And if that means some things we need to reconsider, then we need to reconsider them, because what we have been doing in the past has not been working. This is change knocking at the door and we are saying, I don’t want to open the door! There are no promises. But guess what? Unless you take the chance, the chance will not be yours. All of this going back and forth is wasting time. This Job Makers Act is going through because we need to lay fertile ground to get our people back to work. The property values are something that all of us have benefited from. Visitors come to this country and look at us and say, Wow! Wow! And let’s be more frank, Mr. Speaker, when blacks came to this country back in the mid- ’60s, when things were getting polit ically hot, when they got here they were amazed at the affluence in the 1960s of blacks. And look at us today. We have prospered, but we need to do better. This is about empowering everyone—everyone! We have a black middle class in this country, second to none. And I am not going to let that go down. Yes, I said it. A black middle class, second to none in the world, and we will not allow that to go down. This is about putting our people back to work. And when our young people come back here and cannot find a job . . . they have gotten an education, done what we told them to do, because this is how it works. We are sitting here, fiddly winking, about co nspiracy; that this is about getting white people in here and this kind of stuff. I think we are over analysing things here. There is a paradigm shift taking place. And do you want to know what it is, Mr. Speaker? Our young people are saying, Enough is enough! We don’t want to hear all of this stuff. Just get on to getting the job House of Assembly
2278 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
done. Just do it! We heard earlier, an Honourable Member on the Opposition, say, Just get t he job done. That was what the problem was with, you know, the Tourism Authority in Bermuda. We were just not get-ting it done. In the other places they are just getting it done. Well, let’s get it done! What are we waiting for? Are we waiting for another family to fall into poverty? Are we waiting for another father . . . and someone said, someone had the nerve to say that this Bill here, this piece of legislation, is like the OBA has lost its moral compass. Well, let me tell you about moral compass. We have good people in this country who are considering immoral things to do because we have not acted. And after 10 months I hear the Oppo-sition saying, Nothing has changed. Nothing has changed. Well, I will tell you some things have changed because when we became Government and we did away with term limits, there was a march out here, and we stood up for what we knew was right. Even the Opposition knew it was right to do away with it because it isn’t about politics. It is about doing what is right. So they ca n chirp all they want about the next election. Oh, you won’t be around. That is all right. We are going to do what is right by the people. And nobody ever said it was going to happen overnight and in 10 months. But history will show that many of these things that we have done in just 10 months —and we are going to go through them —a lot has been done in just 10 months. And more is going to get done. So we need to stop doing all of this foolis hness up here in this House and consider the fact that we have young people who are suffering—our future! What is a future? When I had my young daughter, the eldest one came to me and went to the bank and wants to buy a house, but cannot because the husband cannot find a job. Some of your cousins and si sters cannot find a job right now. Suffering! And this is all about laying fertile ground. There is no conspiracy here. This is about la ying fertile ground. And for that matter, Mr. Speaker, if truth be told, we should have been . . . owned a . . . you know, I consider back when we bailed out the Bank of Butterfield. We complained, you know. The Opposition bailed out the Bank of Butterfield, but yet it was the same shareholders they bailed out that they complain about. Why didn’t we open up . . . take that same money, that we backed them, and open up a bank? There was enough money to do it.
[Inaudible interjections]
Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Double standards here. Double standards! So when you had the opportunity to get som ething done to make some real change, it did not ha ppen. The fact is we are where we are today —in tro uble! We are in trouble, and I take exception to the fact that we have Honourable Members that will get up here and say, We’re using scare tactics. Well, you go tell that to the father who cannot feed his family, that we are talking about scare tactics. You talk about a GDP in the negative figures. Come on! We are at stake. Our standard of living, our status is at stake. How many more people do we have to lose before we get it right? So, collaboratively, we need to be saying, Listen, this is about laying fertile ground to get things go-ing. And everyone is listening right now because we are in trouble. That is the reality. If you do not want to believe the numbers, then that is your problem, be-cause the numbers are not lying. They are not lying. So, Mr. Speaker, we heard about angry birds. We heard about lost moral compass. And my kids are always telling me, Dad, I don’t want to hear about yesterday. Let’s talk about the here and now. The reality is, we need to compete. And this is about competing, Mr. Speaker. And so we are going to get some jobs back going here because we got to. We have no other choice. And this, plus many of the other initiatives that we have already put in place, is all a part of making sure that the fertile ground here—the ground here is fertile. And that’s why the Incentives for Job Makers Act is going through. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Mr. Premier. And now we will recognise the leader of the debate, Dr. Grant Gibbons. Dr. Gibbons, you have the floor. [Inaudible interjections] Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am certainly obliged to some of my colleagues who have …
All right. Thank you, Mr. Premier. And now we will recognise the leader of the debate, Dr. Grant Gibbons. Dr. Gibbons, you have the floor.
[Inaudible interjections] Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am certainly obliged to some of my colleagues who have made my wrap- up a lot eas ier. And I am also obliged too for the comments on the other side because I think that helps to flesh out what we are doing here. I do not think I need to go into a lot of detail, but I think it is very simple. The amendments to this legislation are simply trying to retain the jobs we have by providing incentives to the job makers, that are those job creators, and the ones that make decisions about where those jobs are placed. It is also to bas ically allow us to have something to talk about to at-tract new business to Bermuda as well. I would like to move through some of the comments, or the questions that were asked. I think the Honourable Member, Mr. Roban, has helped me here because he said, Why haven’t you been talking about the existing legislation? And I think the answer is very simple. We haven’t been talking about the ex-isting legislation out there in terms of trying to attract House of Assembly
new business because the existing legislation was not very attractive in the form it was in. The Honourable Member kept saying, You are sending the wrong message to Bermudians. And I think, if we have heard anything tonight, the fund amental difference between perhaps the other side of the House, the Opposition, and Government is that the message we are trying to send is not to Bermudians. The message we are trying to send is to the job makers, the job creators here. They are the ones we are trying to send a message to. They are the ones that we have got to get that message to right. And that is a very fundamental difference here. And i t is important that message be sent b ecause, as we have said over and over again, the indi-viduals here have choices. They do not have to be in Bermuda. They can move these jobs. They can move these companies to a lot of other places, whether they be Ireland, Cayman, Canada, Switzerland, the list goes on, Mr. Speaker. So what we are trying to do here is, this job is all about Bermudians. The Oppos ition is trying to make it about non- Bermudians, about exclusive C -suite people. It is, but the net result here is about retaining and creating new Bermudian jobs. Unless we send a message to those who are responsible, who have the power and the ability to be able to do that, and unless it is an attractive message, it is simply not going to work for us. We do not have to see this legislation necessarily from the perspective of Bermudians; we have to see it from the perspective of the non- Bermudians who are the job creators (in most cases) and the job makers here. And that is the entire point. There are a couple of other things that I think are in the same category, and I am going to get to some of the questions on the number of companies and that sort of thing as well. But let me tackle this issue very quickly, because my honourable colleague, Mr. Richards, did fairly well. It is this issue of why are you reducing the fee from $120,000 down to $25,000? These people can afford to pay $120,000. And the answer is, Yes, they can, Mr. Speaker. But just because you can afford to pay something, doesn’t mean you feel good about it or you want to pay it. I will give you a very quick example. I have some done some travel recently, and I had to pay for a visa for my wife and I. It was $200 for each of us to go through a country for two days. That was $400. I can afford to pay that $400, Mr. Speaker, but it an-noyed me that I had to pay $400 to go through a coun try for two days. I said to my wife, “Why don’t we see if we can find another way as opposed to paying that $400?” The same principle applies here. They can afford to pay $120,000, but you will see it reflec ted in the applications so far. A lot of them simply have chosen not to pay that $120,000, or are not prepared to pay it, for the simple reason that it is irritating. It is considered to be too high. It is a hundred times t he normal level. So let me tackle a couple of the issues on the questions on the number of applications because I have got that question asked by a number of speakers on the other side. There were 20 applications for companies that have been received so far. Fifteen of those were approved; eight in 2012 and seven in 2013. Three applications are pending or are on hold. Two applications have just been received in the last week or so. When you move from the companies to the actual number of individuals that we are talking about here, 27 applications requesting exemption from work permits have been received. Twenty -one have been approved; ten in 2012 and eleven in 2013. Four applications are pending. Two applications have just been received the week of the 23 rd of September. One Honourable Member asked me how many have been rejected. The answer is one. So we have not had an extraordinary number of applications, and I think part of that gets back to this broader issue, that the companies and the ind ividuals that were affected here did not find the legisl ation in its current form, the 2011 Act, terribly attractive. A couple of other points. One of the Honour able Members, I think it was the Honourable Member, Mr. Brown, talked about thousands of people that were going to be granted PRC status. Mr. Speaker, there are only thousands of people in this whole in-dustry. I think there are about 3,000 jobs in the entire international business sector here. What we are finding is that, given the small number of applications we have had so far, it is very unlikely that we are going to have anywhere near thousands of PRCs. Maybe we will have 100 or so, and we will have to see how that works out. But gen-erally, the multiplier has not been three, so for every executive, it is usually one more PRC. It is usually a spouse. So, of the seven that are going to be eligible to apply when this Act goes through (and there are only seven that are eligible to apply), basically, of those, they probably have the potential, if they wish to, of eight dependents. So, it is a factor of two, basically, in terms of the number of employees, or senior exec utives here. Let us see. I think I have dealt with some of the questions there. I got a question, of the ABIR companies, how many have actually applied? It is roughly nine or 10 companies have applied in terms of the number of companies that have applied of the 15. So it is about nine or 10 of those. The question of sen-ior executives, I got a question about the definition of “senior executive.” The definition under the current guidelines, which probably will not change, is, The applicant must be a person in a senior executive pos ition in that company and will continue to be employed in the company for the duration of the exemption. That is the definition that has occurred so far. We probably will not change the definition of senior executive, Mr. Speaker. House of Assembly 2280 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Let us see. Other issues. There were a number of questions about the statutory limit of five. I think I answered that question. There are three.
Mr. E. David BurtMr. Speaker. Point of clarification, if the Member would yield. I was listening —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, please, please. POINT OF CLARIFICATION
Mr. E. David BurtI was listening. I was just wondering if he could just repeat that definition of senior executive again, because he was reading kind of fast. I was listening.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWould you, please, read it again? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Yes. I am happy to, Mr. Speaker. In the guidelines that are out there right now, and I think there were also questions as to whether the new guidelines will be released. The answer is: Of course. They …
Would you, please, read it again? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Yes. I am happy to, Mr. Speaker. In the guidelines that are out there right now, and I think there were also questions as to whether the new guidelines will be released. The answer is: Of course. They will be sent out to companies probably in October at some point. But it says, “ [6.] What are the criteria that an employee must meet to be eligible for exemption from Part V of the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Act 1956 . . . ” That is, an exemption from requiring a work permit. And the definition for senior executive is, [6.(b)] “the applicant must be a person in a senior ex-ecutive position in that company and will continue to be employed in the company for the duration of the exemption. That is the guideline that the former Government had; that is the guideline that we will probably maintain, Mr. Speaker. Okay? As far as the PRC situation goes, when people apply, the amendments that we are putting through now do not change the spouse and child sit uation. It is the same policy that has been in place a lready. So that will remain the same as the current legislation in place. Let us see. As far as the issue of the limit of five per company, I think I explained, Mr. Speaker, when I went through my brief that, basically, as the current legislation stands right now, a company that has 25 employees can get five exemptions. A company that has 150 employees can get five exemptions. We feel that is not fair. And what we will do, we are taking away that limit of five. There will be guidelines which will set out how many exemptions you can get depending on the size of the company and perhaps the type of company as well. But we will have to work through those. But what we are saying is that it is unfair and inequitable that a company of 25 employees should get five, and a company of 150 should get five as well. So that is why we are changing that particular limit. Okay. I have got a note here which probably should be added to that definition. “A senior executive has to be responsible for creating and locating jobs as well, or maintaining jobs.” So, I think that is part of the crit eria here. I think, Mr. Speaker, those were the main questions that I got in the course of the debate. I think at this point I would like to move that the Bill be com-mitted. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Dr. Gibbons. It has been moved that the Bill be committed. And I would like to ask if the Deputy Speaker, Mrs. Roberts -Holshouser, would take the Chair [of Commi ttee]. [Pause] House in Committee at 2:06 am [Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Chairman] COMMITTEE ON BILL INCENTIVES FOR …
The ChairmanChairmanHonourable Members, we are now in Committee of the whole [House] for further consider ation of the Bill entitled Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013 . I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister, you have the floor. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Chairman. …
The ChairmanChairmanPlease proceed. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you. Clause 1 is the citation. Clause 2(1) provides for an application for a permanent resident’s certification (that is, a PRC) under section 31A of the Bermuda Immigration and Pr otection Act [BIPA] to be made after or at the same …
Please proceed.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you. Clause 1 is the citation. Clause 2(1) provides for an application for a permanent resident’s certification (that is, a PRC) under section 31A of the Bermuda Immigration and Pr otection Act [BIPA] to be made after or at the same time as an application under section 5 of the Econom-ic Development Act for exemption from Part V of the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Act. Clause 2(2) and the effect of clause 2(2) is that persons who have fallen within section 31A for at least 10 years, since 2002, will be able to apply under House of Assembly
this [clause] for PRC status without waiting until 2015, as provided by the 2011 Act. Clause 3 reduces the fee payable under section 31AB of the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Act for application for a permanent resident’s certif icate from $120,000 down to $25,000. Clause 4 amends the definition of “Minister” in section 1 of the Economic Development Act [EDA], to clarify that it means the Minister responsible for the Bermuda Economic Development Corporation and makes consequential amendments to the Economic Development Act. Clause 5(a) amends section 3B(2)(a) of the Economic Development Act so that applications can be made under that section by companies employing at least 10 Bermudians. The 2011 Act required a mi nimum of 25 Bermudian employees. Clause 5(b) clarifies that the requirement in section 3B(2)(b) to employ Bermudians “at all levels” is subject to the availability of suitably qualified Bermudians. Clause 5(c) corrects an outdated reference to the Ministry of Labour and Industrial Relations. Clause 6(a) replaces section 5( 2) of the Ec onomic Development Act to provide that an application under that section will be determined by the Minister after consultation with the Minister responsible for Immigration. Clause 6(b) replaces section 5(3)(a)(iv) to clarify that it is the retention of jobs with the company in Bermuda for Bermudians and not necessarily the company itself, as provided by the 2011 Act, which is critical for an application. Clauses 6(c) and 6(d) remove the limit of five exempt employees of a company at any one t ime, which was in section 5(4) [of the principal Act] and provide flexibility as to the maximum committed number of employees, by way of guidance issued by the Minister, including the option to set a different max imum for different categories of company, d epending on the matters set out in new subsection (4A), and those are criteria the Minister has to consider when setting the maximum number of exemptions. Finally, clause 7 provides for commencement.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 through 7? The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister for Home Affairs, Mr. Walter H. Roban. You have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Madam Chairman. I would just like to speak to a few clauses, and obviously segueing in from the other part of the debate. I understand why the Government is doing the change in clause 2(1)(2) in relation to the removal, the adjusting of the date of the qualifying …
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would just like to speak to a few clauses, and obviously segueing in from the other part of the debate. I understand why the Government is doing the change in clause 2(1)(2) in relation to the removal, the adjusting of the date of the qualifying date. Your ar-gument has clearly been that you desire to see action and opportunity come immediately as a result of the Act. It is clear that that is what you are doing that for. I understand, and it is clearly what those lobbying for the change have requested, and you are obliging them. Amendment on clause 3, I would just like to raise again the issue of the declining of the fee from the $120,000 to $25,000. We have made very clear on this side that we find this decrease sort of not in the spirit of what the original Act was intending. But Members on the other side have attempted to make a case for why they felt that decreasing it to the $25,000 was necessary. But I would ask, again, other than the r ationale of the lobbying of the alphabet groups, was there any other rationale for feeling that way down to $25,000 was more reasonable than reducing it to $80,000? The $120,000 clearly has some revenue-raising benefits. And the Government is giving up some of that opportunity with doing so. So, is there anything else that the Government can give us on why they are decreasing this so substantially for a group that, on this side, we generally feel can afford it? And when you compare this fee to what is out in the marketplace, it is still, even at $120,000, substantially lower than other jurisdictions that are offering similar opportunities to re- domicile, set up a company and do the same thing that we perhaps desire to do with the Act? So, if the Government has any other rationale, we would like to know, on the reducing of the fee, and why just halving it was not seen as being reasona ble. Why was it $25,000? Was it just a number they picked out of the sky? Or was there a r ationale behind the $25,000 number? I will sit down now.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 through 7? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Finance. You have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, the question is in clause 5(a), “in paragraph (a), delete ‘25’ and substitute ‘10.’” This is the reduction of the number. I would ask if the Minister would please give clarification as to the need to reduce this number, seeing that the …
Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, the question is in clause 5(a), “in paragraph (a), delete ‘25’ and substitute ‘10.’” This is the reduction of the number. I would ask if the Minister would please give clarification as to the need to reduce this number, seeing that the law already allows a Minister the discretion to reduce that number to any amount? The next thing is, Madam Chairman, I wi ll move to clause 6, which amends section 5 of the Economic Development Act. And the Minister no longer . . . if we look at, I guess, under 6(a), where it deletes section 5(2) and substitutes it so that the Mi nister no longer goes to Cabinet; the Minister just makes the determination after a discussion with the Minister for Immigration. House of Assembly 2282 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
I would then ask the question again, which I do not believe was adequately explained in the general debate, What standard will the Minister apply to consider someone as a senior executive? What he just read out just said, A senior executive of a comp any. It does not say what a senior executive is. As we said, the thought was that it was C -Suite individuals. Is the Minister broadening that category? What will he apply? And we are staying with clause 6 as well, because it then goes on to say, in [new] section 5 (4A) that the Minister is specifying guidelines issued for the purpose of this section. The question that I ask, and I do not believe the Minister answered clearly is, y es, I understand that the guidelines will clearly go out to the companies that we are targeting, which was done previously. The question is, Will the guidelines be made public so everyone can understand what the guidelines are? That was the question. Since the companies are not, there was a question of, will they be made public as a measure of transparency? So, I hope that the Minister could answer those questions, and I reserve the right to probe fur-ther. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Home Affairs. You have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanYes. I would also like to go back to clause 5, as my honourable colleague has just referenced, to the 25 down to the 10 figure. Again, I am interested in knowing something about the r ationale behind why the Government felt that the reduc-tion to 10 was appropriate. We …
Yes. I would also like to go back to clause 5, as my honourable colleague has just referenced, to the 25 down to the 10 figure. Again, I am interested in knowing something about the r ationale behind why the Government felt that the reduc-tion to 10 was appropriate. We still argue the case that the reduction in this number sends a message to Bermudians. And irrespective of what the H onourable Minister has said, Bermudians are an essential part of what this Act is about. Yes, we accept they are incentives for job makers, incentives for job makers to create jobs for Bermudians. By definition, “job makers” means that they are creating jobs for somebody, and our priority is Bermudians. So, this figure that they are reducing — again, this Act and the changes that they are making, from the 25 to the 10 does reflect a lack of priority of the job- making incentives. That is one of the arguments that we make. So, fine. If the Government is going to go this way, perhaps the Minister can give, outside of the fact that ABIC and ABIR perhaps have argued for that r eduction, particularly ABIR, because, as was expressed to myself, about 70 per cent of the companies that are in ABIR, their sizes are perhaps less than the 25 number. I understand that. But as my honourable colleague referenced and as I have referenced, in the original Act, the Minister has discretion, frankly, around all these benchmarks to vary, even when it comes to with the term as it relates to the five exec utives. The original Act says “may.” It does not r equire the Minister to follow the five. The guideline says that the number, that the formula upon which it works, is indicative. It is not required. And as I said in an ear-lier part of the debate, we understand that the Mini ster—the Minister should have, in our view, some ability, which the Act provides for, to make a subjective, qualitative or quantitative decision about the profile of that company that is applying. But keep the benchmarks. These benchmarks were set in an appropriate way. Now, one might argue, yes, some of the groups may have had some issues with some of what we said, although the Hon-ourable Member, I do not know what . . . I cannot give authority . . . I cannot say that I fully agree or that what he said is valid, from our standpoint, because I was not [involved] in those conversations even when in Government. But certainly, we do know that Bermuda First and ABIC, when the original Act was presented, endorsed it publicly and approved of what the Act was seeking to achieve. And so, these benchmarks were there. So I would like to hear more from the Minister as to, one, the rationale on why 10 is such . . . Other than what I have said, why does the Government think that 10 is the right number? Is it just because that is what they have been told? Or do they have other quantitative or qualitative ideas around that? Why the amendment in clause 6 is necessary, in light of the fact that the Minister has power within the legislation to work around the five number? Why do they feel it is so necessary to make that change? So I would like to have some answers around that. I do echo the question of my honourable colleague that the guidelines, when they are amended, will be made public. Because one thing we do know, Madam Chairman, is that the previous Government was very interested in this working. And even some of the numbers that the Minister spoke about show that there was an update. If 50 per cent of the ABIC/ABIR members have actually applied, I would say that is pretty good. And there clearly is no timeline in them taking up these opportunities. They may still get suc-cess at 100 per cent. There clearly was interest in this, as interest has already been taken up. So, the argument that there was not a great take- up, the Minister has not quite answered. And also, the Minister has not also quite answered the very point about, How does the Minister evaluate those numbers being low when he has not told us how many people out there are likely to apply? Certainly, ABIC and ABIR could have told him, if they did, how many of their members are likely to have applied. So those are some of the questions. I will sit down now. Perhaps others have other questions. And I hope that the Minister can give some clar ity to those few issues that we have raised. House of Assembly
Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 through 7? The Chair recognises Mr. T. E. Lister, from Sandys South, constituency 33. You have the floor. Hon. Terry E. Lister: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. With regard to clause 5, which was …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 through 7? The Chair recognises Mr. T. E. Lister, from Sandys South, constituency 33. You have the floor. Hon. Terry E. Lister: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. With regard to clause 5, which was just di scussed, the question I had really did not go with why 10 and not 25, but in fact, how many companies qual ify now with 25? I think you said it; I did not quite hear it. And then, how many do you anticipate now that you are down to 10? What would the numbers look like in terms of companies qualifying under this situation? With regard to clause 6(b)(iv), the substitute, under (b), I was a little concerned when the Minister gave his explanation or his definition of someone who was in the position to influence jobs when he men-tioned the VP of claims person.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberSenior. Hon. Terry E. Lister: Senior? Senior VP, okay. I will put the “senior” in front of it. I am not convinced that the Senior VP moves anybody anywhere. I think there are people above that make those sorts of decisions. I would be very surprised if the senior claims …
Senior.
Hon. Terry E. Lister: Senior? Senior VP, okay. I will put the “senior” in front of it. I am not convinced that the Senior VP moves anybody anywhere. I think there are people above that make those sorts of decisions. I would be very surprised if the senior claims person could walk in one day and say, Listen. I am moving everybody out. Mr. President, you can stay here if you like. But I’m taking my claims people and we’re going to Switzerland be-cause there’s a good operation there. [Laughter] Hon. Terry E. Lister: That does not convince me. So I understand there are guidelines. I understand they are consistent with the past. But maybe I was just led astray by the illustration given. With regard to clause 6(c), there presently is a maximum of five employees. Can you give the House an indication of the number of companies that have actually been held back by that maximum of five? You know, it is fine to say, Five isn’t enough. But if we are talking about some 70 companies that are eligible, and only three have exceeded the five, then the five is not a barrier. So I would like to understand how the five is a barrier. I have to say, Madam Chairman, that this whole clause, 6(c) and 6(d), makes me very uncomfortable. Clause 6(c) is very clear in the present form. There are five people. In the new clause, there are a whole pile of things you consider, but there is a catch-all in the end. [New section (4A](e) says in “the inter-est of the community as a whole.” You can cover an y-thing in that. You know, you can do anything and s ay, Well, this is in the best interests of Bermuda. You know, you have heard the speeches tonight. Speec hes from the Opposition, speeches from the Gover nment, and everybody that has stood up said, This is in the best interests of Bermuda. It reminds me of sporting events where both teams pray for God to deliver them the victory. Who is He supposed to let win? I do not know.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Terry E. Lister: Sorry? [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Terry E. Lister: Yes, somebody is going to be disappointed. So the same thing will happen here t onight. I also, Madam Chairman, am uncomfortable with [clause] 3. Clause 3 is changing the requirement to pay $120,000 down to a new requirement of $25,000. If you go past any parking lot during the course of the day, you will see some beautiful Jeeps. Jeeps are the car of the moment. I was going to say car of the year, but it is more than a year. And it seems like everyone that wants a sporty car now drives a Jeep. And the Jeep is $60,000. Many times, if you are in the traffic in the morning and the schoolchildren are going through, and we are talking about now the private school chi ldren, you will see the mother carrying the children off to school. And these may well be the spouses of the persons that we are talking about qualifying under this Act. And they are driving a Jeep. And their Jeep is a $60,000 Jeep. Now, Madam Chairman, I cannot really get this one in my head, that it is okay for that family to buy a Jeep for $60,000. It is okay for the average Bermudian to buy a Jeep for $60,000. But when the Government looks at the $120,000 and says it is too much, they cannot even equate it to a Jeep. They are going to go right down to $25,000. So, what I am going to suggest is that we make our birth right worth a Jeep. And I would like to propose an amendment to this clause to move the—to delete the $25,000 and to substitute $60,000. It is a lot less than $120,000, but it is a lot more than $25,000. And I think it would at least go some way towards rai sing a few more dollars, but also it would go some ways to saying, This thing is of value. My mother always told me, You get what you pay for. And you value how much you put into it. And so if we go ahead and we allow this to go through at $25,000, it makes it worth a lot less than if we move it up to a $60,000 price. So, that is the recommendation that I would like to make, and I am passing this amendment out for the consideration of this House.
House of Assembly 2284 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 3
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. We have in front of us the [amendment]. I will just wait for everyone else to have it in their possession first. What we will do on it is we will discuss it, and then we will have a vote on it before we proceed. So, the …
Thank you, Member. We have in front of us the [amendment]. I will just wait for everyone else to have it in their possession first. What we will do on it is we will discuss it, and then we will have a vote on it before we proceed. So, the [amendment] that we have reads , “Incentives for Job Makers Bill 2013,” from the Honour able T. E. Lister, to move, “Amends Clause 3 as fol-lows: After the word ‘substitute’ delete ‘$25,000’ and substitute ‘$60,000.’” Does everyone have their copies? Is there an objection to the motion that has been put before us? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Honourable Member, Dr. E. G. (Grant) Gibbons, Minister of Economic Development. You have the floor.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: It is getting late, Madam Chairman. Thank you, Madam Chair man. I have not had an opportunity, I think, to talk about this in the current context. But the simple fact of the matter is, we have been saying this is not about affordability, whether they can afford a Jeep or whet her they can afford $120,000; we know they can. This is about a discussion that took place with many, with different organisations, ABIC, ABIR, Bermuda First and all the rest of it. It is basically about sending a message that we value their contribution. And there was a very clear indication that came back from the very beginning of the year when we were Government that $120,000 was considered to be much too high. I understand where the Honourable Member is coming from; he is looking for a compromise. But, quite frankly, the same way that $120,000 was an arbitrary number and $60,000 is an arbitrary number, we are going to stick with the $25,000.
[Inaudible interjections and laughter]
The ChairmanChairmanWe are going to vote on it. Do you want to speak to it first?
The ChairmanChairmanYes, thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Home Affairs. You have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanYes, Madam Chairman. We have articulated our view on this. And the Indepen dent Member has clearly put forth a proposal around it. We have found that the number $25[,000] was exorb itantly low. The Minister has not actually given any r ationale as to why $25[,000] was chosen, any …
Yes, Madam Chairman. We have articulated our view on this. And the Indepen dent Member has clearly put forth a proposal around it. We have found that the number $25[,000] was exorb itantly low. The Minister has not actually given any r ationale as to why $25[,000] was chosen, any more than why $120[,000] is so prohibitive. So, the Honourable Member has not actually even given a rationale yet as to why the number $25,000 was prohibitive . And I raise the question again that I raised before: What price Bermuda? What price for the opportunity and privilege to have a per-manent position in this country that would allow one to have a stable family life that we all covet and desire? Is $25,000 really how much it is worth? Because that is what we are proposing to offer to those who wish to take it up. Do we have such a low value of ourselves? So, the Member has not rationalised why the $25,000 was the ideal number, other than the effective lobbying of certain groups. But why the Gover nment thought it was the appropriate number. So, in speaking to the proposal of the Honourable Independent Member, it seems to be a compromise nu mber of sorts. We did ask, ourselves, Why not $80,000? Why not? But the Honourable Member who speaks for this Bill has yet to answer that question. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members? There are no other Members. We will call . . . Sorry. The Chair recognises the Honourable Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin, Minister of Health and Seniors. You have the floor. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Ma dam Chairman. Madam Chairman, maybe …
Thank you. Are there any other Members? There are no other Members. We will call . . . Sorry. The Chair recognises the Honourable Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin, Minister of Health and Seniors. You have the floor.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Ma dam Chairman. Madam Chairman, maybe I can approach this from a slightly diff erent slant and maybe assist the Honourable Member who just had his question. And that is, Why $25,000? And sometimes, we may be just too close to the forest to see the trees. Because, look in the context of the building that we are putting up in Point Fi nger Road, where some of these very people have cut cheques for si gnificant amounts of money, million- dollar cheques to help to defray the cost of us building a hospital. These are the kinds of benefits that will inure to the people of Bermuda when somebody feels as though they belong and that we are giving them that embracing approach. And while I am not suggesting for a second that we sell Bermuda, every million helps. And if we are going to say, Oh, we’re going to charge you $120,000 —and they do not feel that they are getting value for their $120,000—and they leave and take with them the jobs and the million dollars that could end up helping to pay for my hospital I think we have to start to look at the total value added. And I hope that it sheds a sligh tly different light on it, but certainly a perspective which we have to appreciate has value for the community. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members? The Chair recognises Mr. Rolfe P. Commi ssiong, Shadow Minister of Workforce Development. You have the floor. House of Assembly
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongThank you, Madam [Chai rman]. Madam Chairman, you know, we on this side appreciate the contributions of international business to Bermuda’s welfare. Although, like I said earlier in an earlier debate, I do not believe we would be una lloyed cheerleaders, I think we have to view it more soberly. …
Thank you, Madam [Chai rman]. Madam Chairman, you know, we on this side appreciate the contributions of international business to Bermuda’s welfare. Although, like I said earlier in an earlier debate, I do not believe we would be una lloyed cheerleaders, I think we have to view it more soberly. But nonetheless, with respect to the Honourable Minister’s comments just now, I also think we need to be careful of going down the road, or what I would term the “Masters of the Universe syndrome” that, somehow, individuals who have derived great benefit from Bermuda, not the least of which has been the ability to work here and not pay any personal i ncome tax on their considerable earnings, or for their compani es to pay any corporate income taxes, should be something that they should appreciate as being one of the chief values that Bermuda brings to the table. The fact that they, in lieu of that, do charitable work and make charitable contributions is not som ething that we should not appreciate. But certainly, that should not in and of itself make us feel that we are somehow massively indebted. Bermuda does provide great value to them. Just getting back to this clause here, this amendment that my colleague, Mr. Lister, the Ind ependent colleague, has put forward here, I just think it would be a good- faith compromise that will bring us back together in a unified way in terms of moving for-ward on this issue. I think it would send a great signal to the Bermudian public that, despite the, at times, acrimonious debate that took place here over the last hour or so, that in the end we could come together with a good- faith compromise, which I certainly would endorse. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the amendment that has been presented? If there are no other individuals, we will call a vote on the amendment. Again, this is an amendment that reads, “Amends Clause 3 as follows: After the word ‘substitute’. delete …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the amendment that has been presented? If there are no other individuals, we will call a vote on the amendment. Again, this is an amendment that reads, “Amends Clause 3 as follows: After the word ‘substitute’. delete ‘$25,000’. and substitute ‘$60,000’.” All those Members in favour of the motion, please, say Aye. All those opposed, please, say Nay.
AYES AND NAYS.
The ChairmanChairmanI believe the Nays have it. [Gavel] [Motion defeated: Proposed amendment to clause 3 of the Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013, not passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanThe Minister will continue. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Let me try and tackle a couple of these other questions. There has been quite a discussion about the need to move from 25 down to 10 employees, when in fact Honourable Members are quite correct: …
The Minister will continue.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Let me try and tackle a couple of these other questions. There has been quite a discussion about the need to move from 25 down to 10 employees, when in fact Honourable Members are quite correct: There is discretion under the existing Act for the Mi nister to consider companies below 25. The answer is very simple. This is more about a marketing approac h than it is really about the actual number. Because what we are looking to do here is to try and attract companies that may start with a smaller number of Bermudian employees, but have the poten-tial for great growth later on. And if you have a num-ber out there at 25, there may be a number of people who may not be as familiar with this legislation as people who are already here, who may feel somehow that that is the limit and that there seems to be sort of an implication that 25 is the cut -off point, when in fact the discretion is there. So, we are simply, from almost a marketing perspective, for us to try and attract new business, taking it down to 10. There is still a discretion to look at companies under 10, as there has been before. But it is as much optics as it is anything else. And I will be quite transparent about that. Let us see. The issue of removing the limit of five employees, I think I have been around that a couple of times. And I think what people should understand is, it is an “up to” or it is “more.” It is a discr etionary issue. The new section [5](4A) allows the Mi nister, working with the Minister of Immigration, to con-sider different factors to bring to bear here. And I think it is, as I said, an issue simply of fairness and equit ableness , that particularly as there may be cases where you have much larger companies that may in the future at some point [require this]. So far, we have not seen the need for it, but it is simply providing flex ibility, I guess would be a way to put it. In terms of the standard, again, I guess the question was asked on clause 6(a) . . . I think the question was, What standard will be applied or what guidelines will be applied to the definition of “senior executive?” What I would refer the Honourable Mem-ber to is the definitions which already exist under the Economic Development Act from the previous piece of legislation, which is, the applicant has to meet certain criteria. And I will just read a couple of those off that are already there. I think the most important ones are [at section 5(3)(a)]: “(ii) the applicant must be a person in a senior executive position in that company; “(iii) the applicant must be responsible for making decisions that are critical to the continuity of the company in Bermuda;” House of Assembly 2286 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
And this is the amended version: “(iv) the co ntinued presence of jobs in Bermuda with the company for persons with Bermudian status must be dependent on the applicant remaining in Bermuda; and” “(v) the applicant’s continued employment in the company designated under 3B(2) for the duration of the exemption . . . .” So, basically what we are talking about is, they have to be responsible for the presence of the company in Bermuda, they must be responsible for the jobs. And I think that rules out a lot of what I will call more junior - or middle- level people. The guidelines will probably be amended slightly, but in essence, they are probably not going to change very much from where they are now. Let us see what else. Okay. I think those . . . I think that is pretty much it, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Finance.
Mr. E. David BurtI just have a follow -up question for the Minister, because he said that is it, and I do not believe so. And maybe I did not hear, as the hour is late. But will he commit to publicly releasing or even tabling in this House for Members to see …
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Minister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Yes. Thank you, Madam Chairm an. I did say that they would be released in Oct ober. They will be sent out to companies, and I will cer-tainly provide the Honourable Member with a copy of it.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Minister. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Workforce Development. You have the floor.
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongThank you, Madam Chai rman. Minister, is there any indication of the size of the potential pool of applicants that may exist at this time that would be eligible for the incentives for job makers? The Cha irman: Thank you. Minister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: I have not …
Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Minister, is there any indication of the size of the potential pool of applicants that may exist at this time that would be eligible for the incentives for job makers?
The Cha irman: Thank you. Minister?
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: I have not been told, and I do not think the companies have canvassed across the board, how many may yet apply. What I can tell you is that, in terms of those that are eligible immediately to apply for PRC status, that number has been worked out at seven. They will have been here 10 years. They would have been exempted 10 years ago, because 10 years ago the company they are working for now would have been exempted under the criteria in the Econom ic Deve lopment Act. So, I think a lot of people sense that there may be an immediate flood of people that will have PRC status. You have to essentially have crossed two criteria. One is, the company has to be exempted. And then they have to be here for 10 years. So, it is going to be quite a ways in the future before some of these chickens come home to roost, as they say. Sor-ry. That is probably a bad turn of phrase.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberYes. It is not a good comparison. But we get the picture. [Laughter] Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Before some of these people will be eligible for PRC status.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Government Whip and the Government House Leader. You have the floor.
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsJust a question, based on what the Minister has just said. He said the company has to be exempted. Does this here apply to non- international business businesses? And I am thinking of large restaurants that may have 20, 30, 40 people? Does it apply to law firms? Does it …
Just a question, based on what the Minister has just said. He said the company has to be exempted. Does this here apply to non- international business businesses? And I am thinking of large restaurants that may have 20, 30, 40 people? Does it apply to law firms? Does it apply to accounting firms that have been around for awhile? Their owners may not be Bermudian, but they have 20– 30 people that are Bermudian.
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: I think the simple answer, Madam Chairman, is that there is no criterion in the legislation which says it has to be an exempt company or international business. There have been some applications from an accounting firm, or two ac-countings firms. But obviously, …
Minister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: I think the simple answer, Madam Chairman, is that there is no criterion in the legislation which says it has to be an exempt company or international business. There have been some applications from an accounting firm, or two ac-countings firms. But obviously, they are in a slightly different position, and it is a higher bar. Those applic ations are pending right now to see whether sufficient justification can be provided.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 [through] 7? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Health and Seniors. You have the floor.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThank you, Madam Chai rman. House of Assembly I just have a question for the Minister. Mini ster, the successful applicants, will they be listed as they are successful, whether it be weekly, monthly, semi -annually?
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members while he is gathering that? Are there any other Members? Are you ready? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thanks, Madam Chairman. To the best of my knowledge, those appl icants have not been made public at this point under the previous Government, and they …
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 [through] 7 on the Bill, Ince ntives for Job Makers Act 2013? If there are no other Members . . . Minister? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thanks, Madam Chairman. I would like to …
The ChairmanChairmanHow about the clauses? Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Oh, sorry. I would like to move clauses 1 [through] 7, first.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 1 through 7 be approved. Are there any objections to that motion? There are no objections. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clauses 1 to 7 passed.] Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: I move the Pre amble.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Preamble be approved. Are there any objections to that motion? Agreed to. [Gavel] Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: I move that the Bill be reported to the House.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House as printed. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to. The Bill will be reported to the House, as printed. [Motion carried: The Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013 was considered by a Committee of …
It has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House as printed. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to. The Bill will be reported to the House, as printed.
[Motion carried: The Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013 was considered by a Committee of the wh ole House and passed without amendment,]
House resumed at 2:45 am [28 September2013]
[Pause] [Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair]
REPORT OF COMMITTEE
INCENTIVES FOR JOB MAKERS ACT 2013
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Members, the Second Reading of the Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013 has been approved. And we move now to the next Order. And the next Order is the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013, in the name of the Mi nister for Public Safety, Minister …
Yes, Members, the Second Reading of the Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013 has been approved. And we move now to the next Order. And the next Order is the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013, in the name of the Mi nister for Public Safety, Minister Dunkley. Minister Dunkley, you have the floor.
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move that the Bill entitled the Bermuda I mmigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013 be now read the second time and committed.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAre there any objections to that? Minister, please, carry on. BILL SECOND READING BERMUDA IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION AMENDMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2013 Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker and Honourable Members of this House, I am pleased to rise this morning to introduce the Bill entitled …
Are there any objections to that? Minister, please, carry on.
BILL
SECOND READING
BERMUDA IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION AMENDMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2013 Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker and Honourable Members of this House, I am pleased to rise this morning to introduce the Bill entitled Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act on behalf of the Substantive Minister of Home Affairs, who sits in another place, but he is sitting in this place this morning with the Permanent Secretary and the Chief Immigration O fficer. The Bill addresses eight specific matters and incorporates a few consequential amendments. The first related to the work permit application, making the prospective employer responsible for the accuracy of the application. House of Assembly 2288 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
The second addressing language in the Act, ensuring that the definition of “exceptional person,” already contained in the Act, applies to work permits. The third clarifies that the most recent employer is responsible for the costs associated with the repatriation of a person and their qualifying depend-ents when a work permit has ended. While the fourth, Mr. Speaker, provides po wers to the Chief Immigration Officer to impose civil penalties of $5,000 for the first offence or $10,000 for a second or subsequent offence on a person who vi olates the Act. The fifth, Mr. Speaker, sets out procedures for natural justice before a civil penalty is imposed. And the sixth provides persons aggrieved by the Chief Immigration Officer’s decision to impose a civil penalty the right to appeal to the Supreme Court. The seventh provides that a person’s former employer shall be responsible for deportation expenses of the employee and any qualifying dependents if warranted. And finally, the eighth, Mr. Speaker, increases the criminal penalties in section 141 of the principal Act from $5,000 to $10,000 for the first offence, and from $10,000 to $25,000 for the second or subs equent offences. Mr. Speaker, honourable colleagues will know that Bermuda enjoys a relatively well -regulated bus iness environment, making it an attractive place to do business. Notwithstanding the global economy, historically, local and international businesses have thrived in Bermuda. Our economy has traditionally had more jobs than we have had people to fill them. O n the one hand, given the nature of the economy, there are some job categories where we simply have not had the benefit of providing sufficient human resources in order to satisfy the demand. On the other hand, in a thriving economic environment, our people had many choices and chose to not avail themselves of certain jobs in certain job categories. In both cases, Mr. Speaker, there was an influx of nonBermudian workers to fill the demand. Mr. Speaker, failed economic policies contributed to the decline in the local economy that has negatively affected the job market. The 2013 employment brief indicates that in 2012, aggregate employment dipped sharply. Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, there were 1,956 fewer filled jobs in Bermuda between 2011 and 2012. Total filled jobs dropped from 37,399 in 2011 to 35,443 in 2012, which equates to a 5.2 per cent de-crease year over year. This marked the fourth con-secutive year that the job market has declined. The level of jobs filled at 35,443 is the lowest on record since 1998, when there was a reported 35,323 filled jobs in the economy. Mr. Speaker, Bermudians accounted for just over half —54 per cent, or 1,055—of the job losses in 2012. Guest workers accounted for 873, while nonBermudian spouses of Bermudians lost 41 jobs. Mr. Speaker, as the economy weakened and Bermudians experienced job losses, many argued that a weak work permit violations regime and a fai lure to effectively manage non- Bermudian workflow into the Island has disadvantaged Bermudian workers. Others have argued that a weak work permit violation regime puts Bermuda out of step with competitive j urisdictions. In considering this matter and in accordance with our election platform, Mr. Speaker, the Gover nment determined that a holistic approach was neces-sary, one that involved growing the economy, creating jobs, sustaining existing jobs and strengthening our regulatory environment in an effort to maintain our attractiveness as a first -class business jurisdiction. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, in February of 2013, the Government eliminated the term limit policy, a pol-icy that has been identified as a barrier to Bermuda’s attractiveness as a business -friendly jurisdiction. You will recall, Mr. Speaker, that this policy was set aside with a commitment to strengthen the work permit compliance regime. In April 2013, the Government implemented phase one of the reform work permit policies, involving the jobs currently in the closed and restricted categories, listing two open job categories for Bermudians seeking to re- establish careers in these areas. Categories like masons, carpenters, ad-ministrative assistants, room attendants, kitchen por-ters, dish pot washers and landscape gardeners were all added to the restricted categories listed under this administration. Simultaneously, Mr. Speaker, the Government modified the work permit application process to i nclude a Recruitment Disclosure Form. This new form, that now forms part of the work permit application, requires that the employer discloses all Bermudian applicants interviewed, together with contact information and a detailed assessment of each Bermudian applicant, including details as to why the Bermudian applicant was deemed unsuitable. While a letter attesting to some of the afor ementioned has been required in the past, the diffe rence now, Mr. Speaker, is the employer is required to sign a declaration swearing the content is truthful, with the full knowledge that any false statement is subject to penalty. The introduction of the Recruitment Discl osure Form was a first step towards a strengthened work permit violations compliance regime. Mr. Speaker, the Bill this morning advances the tightening of compliance efforts with a view to bringing Bermuda’s work permit violation compliance regime in line with competitive jurisdictions. For i nstance, the Cayman Islands immigration law provides for any immigration officer at or above the rank of deputy chief immigration officer to impose a fine of up to $5,000 for work permit violations. Also in the Ca yman Islands, the chief immigration officer shall keep and maintain a register of all administrative fines and levies imposed under their law in consequence of the House of Assembly
breach of any of its provisions. This register, akin to a name and shame register, contains the names and addresses of persons in the breach; the nature, loc ation and the date of the breach; any measures taken by the chief immigration officer in the consequence of the breach; and the amount of fine or levy imposed and the date on which it was paid. Mr. Speaker, in the United Kingdom immigr ation rules, it is unlawful to employ a person who is not entitled to work in the UK. Any employer who employs a worker who cannot legally work in the UK may face a civil penalty of up to £ 10,000 for each illegal worker. And if the employer knowingl y employs an illegal worker, they may face a criminal penalty of up to two years imprisonment for employing them. In addition to the civil penalty, an employer may also be liable for additional costs, such as unpaid taxes, Social Security payments and/or the cost of repatriating the illegal worker. The UK Border Agency also has the authority to serve, on the spot, penalty notices if an employer is found to be less than diligent in their recruitment and employment practices. Mr. Speaker, the proposed legislation borrows some from our competitors, and consideration has been given to include several of the tools that other jurisdictions use, such as the name and shame regi ster used in the Cayman Islands, or on- the-spot ticke ting and penalty notices in the UK. H owever, these items were dropped during the consultation phase of the policy development as they were deemed to be draconian measures. Mr. Speaker, with the introduction of the amendments proposed this morning, Bermuda is taking the necessary steps to strike the right balance that brings our work permit violation compliance regime in line with competitive jurisdictions, while remaining business friendly, and simultaneously, Mr. Speaker, permitting fair employment practices that serve to pr otect the interests of Bermudian workers seeking e mployment opportunities in Bermuda. While there are several housekeeping matters that have been addressed in the proposed amend-ments, such as clarifying the definition of a work per-mit, clarifying that the employer has certain respons ibilities such as accountability for the accuracy and validity of the work permit application, as well as clar ifying that the employer has specific obligations, incl usive of repatriation, the most progressive provision is that which establishes powers to impose civil pena lties for work permit violations. Mr. Speaker, this prov ision allows the Chief Immigration Officer to impose a civil penalty on a person who contravenes the Act — that is, one who: • engages in gainful occupation without a work permit ; • engages in gainful occupation which is outside the scope of his or her work permit; • employs a person to engage in gainful occ upation when that person does not have a work permit; • employs a person to engage in gainful occ upation which is outside the scope of that person’s work permit; and • with the written notice, fails to submit reques ted documents within a 24- hour period without reasonable excuse to do so. Mr. Speaker, the violations are set out in such a manner that the Chief Immigration Officer may i mpose penalties on both the employer and the work permit holder, or either one or the other, depending on the circumstances of the specific matter. A first offence carries a fine of $5,000, and a second or subsequent offence, if committed within seven years of the first offence, carries a $10,000 fine. The seven- year provision is borrowed from the [R ehabilitation] of Offenders Act, wherein convictions of certain offences can be considered spent after a sev-en-year period. Mr. Speaker, the natural justice process will apply in every case, which means that all parties will have the opportunity to provide evidence to compl iance officers as part of the investigative process. Wherein it is deemed that a violation has occurred, the Act provides for specific procedures for imposing civil penalties, which will include the method by which the Chief Immigration Officer will notify a person by warning notice of a violation committed, stating the amount of the penalty, the reason for imposing the penalty and their right to make representation within seven days in their defence of why a penalty should not be imposed. Mr. Speaker, the Chief Immigration Officer has seven days after the period has ended to decide whether to impose a penalty. Further, the Chief Imm igration Officer will be required to provide the person with a decision notice with respect to the imposition of a penalty. If the decision is to impose a penalty, the decision notice will specify the amount of the penalty, the reason for the decision and the person’s right to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court within 21 days of the date of the decision notice. An appeal to the Supreme Court, as opposed to the Immigration Appeals Tribunal, signifies the s everity of the matter and separates violations of the Act from the review of the Ministerial decisions. Mr. Speaker, the Chief Immigration Officer will have no discretion with respect to the amount of the fine. The person may opt out after 21 days of the decision notice to pay the penalty in full, or apply to the Chief Immigration Officer for a payment schedule after paying a portion of the fine. All civil penalties will go into the Consolidated Fund. Mr. Speaker, the introduction of this regime gives the compliance team and the Chief Immigration Officer some teeth so that they might become far House of Assembly 2290 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
more effective in enforcing compliance of work permit legislation. These teeth complement the Minister’s ability to revoke work permits as the situation may require, a provision already enshrined in the Act that, unlike the civil penalty, can be applied to the Immigr ation Appeals Tribunal. Mr. Speaker, for the most part, under the existing provisions, those who fail to comply with work permit provisions of the Act generally get away with a warning letter, and historically, more extreme cases that have been advanced to the courts have resulted in insignificant fines. As a result of the increased focus that the current administration has directed towards the issue of work permit compliance, however, the most recent matter before the courts resulted in a more appropriate fine. Also, a total of 19 warning le tters for compliance matters have been issued since January of 2013. Mr. Speaker, during the consultation phase of the policy development that preceded the proposed amendments, stakeholders, including the Bermuda Human Resources Association, Bermuda Employers Council, Bermuda Hotel Association and all others represented on the work permit stakeholder group were consulted, and most expressed support for the amendments that are designed to create an environ-ment of accountability for employers and employees, particularly those who deliberately violate existing im-migration policy and legislation. Notwithstanding the support, industry has expressed some concerns, stressing that employee functions during times of acts of God or emergencies such as fires, industrial action, floods, et cetera, need to be exempt from penalties and that employers and employees who work for central services and central industries need to be generally in a special category. Also, Mr. Speaker, that staff shortages, where man-agers are assisting staff to undertake their duties and those taking action to ensure excellent customer ser-vice, need to be given special consideration. To this end, Mr. Speaker, the work permit stakeholder group will work with the Department of Immigration in a collaborative manner in advance of the publishing of the commencement date order that will bring these amendments into force to produce: 1. a code of practice and ethical standards; 2. an investigation methods, preparation and control, or case files, manual, for immigration offences; and finally, Mr. Speaker, 3. a code of practice method, a schedule of d etermining penalties for work permit violations. Further, Mr. Speaker, compliance officers will undergo intensive training to strengthen their invest igative skills. Mr. Speaker, it is important to note that complaints regarding work permit violations come from many different sources. However, there are often times when those working for an employer that is committing a suspected offence feel intimidated and fear reprisal by the employer, should they file a complaint. To this end, the proposed amendments include a consequential amendment to the Employment Act 2000, section 29A, (whistle- blowers), and the Good Governance Act 2012, section 3, Offence of terminat-ing contract with, or withholding payment from, a whi stle-blower, by adding the Chief Immigration Officer as a listed person or a person making a protected discl osure for offences against this Act . This amendment therefore makes it an offence for an employer to terminate or penalise an em-ployee who has filed a work permit violation complaint with the Chief Immigration Officer. Mr. Speaker, there is a minor correction to be made on this provision, and I will make it during the Committee stage. Mr. Speaker, anecdotal evidence suggests that there are only 10 [per cent] to 15 per cent of employers who historically violate work permit provisions of the Act. These offences can no longer be tolerated. Such violations are not in the best interests of the people of Bermuda. Bermuda’s immigration infrastruc-ture is starting to move in the right direction. It is our expectation that the proposed civil penalties regime, in accordance with the amendments to the Act, will serve to deter employers and employees from knowingly committing work permit violations and to foster a greater respect for Bermuda’s immigration laws. Mr. Speaker, this concludes my presentation on the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013, and I trust that it is clear that this legislation is yet another promise made and a nother promise delivered. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I now invite Honourable Members to participate in this debate this morning.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Minister. The Chair will recognise the Shadow Minister, MP Roban. MP Roban, from constituency 15, Pembroke East, Shadow Minister of Home Affairs. You have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Mr. Speaker. My presentation will not be as long as the Minister’s on this. We have no objection to the amendments that the Government is bringing here. As the Minister has made it clear, the Government has made certain promises that they would increase pe nalties around the …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My presentation will not be as long as the Minister’s on this. We have no objection to the amendments that the Government is bringing here. As the Minister has made it clear, the Government has made certain promises that they would increase pe nalties around the immigration framework. This is clea rly what they have proposed here. We see these as being appropriate. In fact, to some degree (I am perhaps just slightly jesting here, Mr. Speaker), the Minister was almost trying to pick a bit of a fight in his brief, but I will resist the temptation —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerVery good. At this hour in the morning, I appreciate it. House of Assembly
Mr. Walter H. Roban—to say anything on those points. But what I will suggest is that it is very interesting that these amendments are coming, because we have had some indication by questions previously answered in this House that there have been some, that on the permit side that there is not as …
—to say anything on those points. But what I will suggest is that it is very interesting that these amendments are coming, because we have had some indication by questions previously answered in this House that there have been some, that on the permit side that there is not as much strength and perhaps discipline for the Government, particularly in some categories that the Minister men-tioned, namely, masons, carpenters and plumbers, that there has been an increase in permit issuances in those areas since January. But I will not make that a big issue today. But I would perhaps compare it a bit to a tub full of water. And that we are told that the tub is full of water and will stay full. But as you look more closely, there is a tap on the side and the tap is drip-ping, and it is dripping quite quickly in that, despite the fact that the Government is bringing these strong pr ovisions, civil and criminal, that in other areas things are happening a little bit more fluidly. But we will have a watching eye on this, because, ultimately, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to en-forcement and penalties, the proof is in the pudding. And if we begin to see actions in the community, b ecause certainly constituents and others who come to us say they are still seeing things happening that should not be happening in reference to immigration. Now, let us make it clear, Mr. Speaker. This is not just about Bermudian workers. And obviously, that is the duty of the Government to ensure Bermudian workers are protected under law. But we are also concerned that within that 10 per cent [mentioned] that infractions [take place] against our migrant wor kers, those who come here to work, who are invited, so they should also be treated well and should feel that they can come to the department when they are being abused or not treated well under a contractual ar-rangement, of which they should be treated fairly, paid well, benefits properly provided and that their work environments are healthy and suitable for them to be productive. So it is not just about the protections for our Bermudians. And we understand that that is certainly a part of the main picture. But those who come here to work in whatever capacity there is, as long as they have come here properly, should be protected under the law. And if these penalties go toward effective enforcement of infractions by any employer, then irr espective of whom they are abusing, they should be effectively applied. Also, we hope that the Government, in its efforts to ensure that these particular penalties are widely understood will also appreciate that they should not only communicate with, presumably, the stakeholders that the Honourable Minister has men-tioned, but also reach out to the associations of the different ethnic groups that are here, because we find often that their citizens who are members of their groups do find themselves in compromising positions with local employers. So, communicating to them about the whistle- blower amendment and what av enues are available to them to be protected, and the enforcement measures that the Government has put in, I think is also a good outreach for the Government to do, other than with the traditional stakeholder s they might have spoken to. The Minister did mention them, but I think it is good to widen that outreach so that all associations, commercial associations as well as et hnic associations, in the Island understand what these new penalty regimes are providing. With that, I will conclude my statement. We have no objections to the amendment that the Go vernment is providing, and ultimately, the proof will be in the pudding. And we will see results as time goes on, perhaps. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Government Whip.
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsThank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise. I will not be very long. I rise on this topic because it is very, very near and dear to my heart. First of all, I would like to commend the Minister for bringing this legislation to the House of Assembly, in …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGot away with it. [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGot away with it. You should have just kept going. [Inaudible interjections and laughter]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsAs I said, Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the Minister for bringing this legislation to Bermuda, because it is near and dear to my heart. Mr. Speaker, we are talking about emplo yment in Bermuda, and we are talking about protecting the interests of Bermudians, PRCs and migrant …
As I said, Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the Minister for bringing this legislation to Bermuda, because it is near and dear to my heart. Mr. Speaker, we are talking about emplo yment in Bermuda, and we are talking about protecting the interests of Bermudians, PRCs and migrant wor kers. And to me, it just demonstrates that we are not only concerned about the international business sector; we are also concerned about local businesses, local employees. I remember when I served on the Immigration Board. And I am just going to give you a little scenario of what actually happened. I sat on the board for a number of years before I became a Member of Parliament. And I was vetting a number of applications. And one reinsurance company came to me, came to the board with an application to hire an accountant. There were 15 accountants that applied for the job. And these were top- notch accountants that have gone House of Assembly 2292 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
on to become partners at accounting firms, reinsurance companies, banking and other industries. But yet, the application hired a newly minted expatriate worker. And they did not list the names of experienced CAs that had applied for the job. And from that moment on, I vowed that I would do som ething, and even more to protect the interests of Bermudians when it comes to immigration and my infl uence over the Immigration Department as an MP, b ecause it is not right to have qualified Bermudians out there looking for a job, and these 10 per cent of the companies who are not abiding by the laws are abus-ing them. So, Mr. Speaker, this is a well -crafted piece of legislation. And I also want to commend Government on the introduction of the Recruitment Disclosure Form, because this really is where the rubber meets the road and holds the companies accountable, that they are companies of integrity. By signing this disclosure form, not only the HR departments, but the CEOs become accountable for the performance of their companies. So, I think this is well, well -crafted. There was one other issue that I think could be added. And the Minister’s presentation said . . . And I have a copy of it here. If you will allow me a second?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Carry on, Member.
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsIt says, “Simultaneously, . . . the Government modified the work permit application process to include a Recruitment Disclosure Form. This new form, that now forms part of the work permit application, requires that the employer discloses all Bermudian applicants interview ed.” I would also suggest that the Minister consider …
It says, “Simultaneously, . . . the Government modified the work permit application process to include a Recruitment Disclosure Form. This new form, that now forms part of the work permit application, requires that the employer discloses all Bermudian applicants interview ed.” I would also suggest that the Minister consider extending that to “all applicants applying for the job and/or interviewed. Because my concern is, a lot of Bermudians are discouraged in going forward to an interview, even though they are qualified. And I have seen that happen. I have seen that happen. And so, I would recommend that the recruitment disclosure form ensure that all qualified Bermudians who have applied for it be included. I know that a number of —
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Point of clarif ication.
[Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Yes? We need a point of clar ification. POINT OF CLARIFICATION Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: No, it does . . . To clarify, it does do exactly what he implies it does. So, it is all straight.
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsWhat you are saying, Mr. Minister, is that it will list all applicants that have ap-plied for the job and not necessarily interviewed? Thank you. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. N. H. Cole SimonsI know, but I am just saying this because, again, the public is listening and we need to have clarity for the public. And, in addition, we are looking out for our Bermudians. We are looking out for our qualified people who are looking for jobs, who are looking for …
I know, but I am just saying this because, again, the public is listening and we need to have clarity for the public. And, in addition, we are looking out for our Bermudians. We are looking out for our qualified people who are looking for jobs, who are looking for opportunities, and there are people out there, companies out there that have histor ically abused our system. So, we are now correcting that and letting those know, those who are malfeasant in abusing the immigration laws, that we are coming after them. And we are coming after them with the fullness of the law and that we will be unmerciful if they are abusing the law and abusing our professional Bermudians. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member, the Shadow Minister of Education, Walton Brown. MP Brown.
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Mr. Speaker. House of Assembly Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the Government on this legislation. [Inaudible interjections and laughter]
Mr. Walton BrownIt is sound. It is very thoughtful. And it addresses a lot of the issues that have plagued a number of people in this country. And so I am happy to see that there is a modicum of a moral compass being exhibited, Mr. Speaker. The only issue that I …
It is sound. It is very thoughtful. And it addresses a lot of the issues that have plagued a number of people in this country. And so I am happy to see that there is a modicum of a moral compass being exhibited, Mr. Speaker. The only issue that I have, Mr. Speaker, is that one of the areas of tremendous abuse relates to the domestic workers. And the domestic workers often do not have a voice. They work as individuals, and they are reluctant to come to any authority to make any complaint. So I would like to encourage or as k the Ministry if they will begin a series of just checks, ran-dom checks, to see if the contracts that the domestic workers have signed are being honoured by the employer, if all the deductions are being made and so forth. Because I have heard too many stories of do-mestic workers who worked here for years, have been badly treated by the employer and then had to leave the Island. So, this legislation I support. It is very good. The issue I would like to see addressed relates to domestic workers. And I would be happy to hear words of encouragement in this regard from the Mini stry as opposed to seeing anything being formally l egalised. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now recognises the Shadow Minister of Finance. MP David Burt, you have the floor.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWell, why are you speaking? [Laughter]
Mr. E. David BurtWell, because I have to! Because I represent a lot of people in Pembroke West Central, Mr. Speaker. And they are paying me to be here this morning.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerVery good. Very good. Good answer.
Mr. E. David BurtAnd I want to make sure that I am on record on this piece of legislation, because I believe it is very important. Now, just like my MP, I will stand up and I will commend the Government on bringing this legislation. Anyone who knows me and knows me in …
And I want to make sure that I am on record on this piece of legislation, because I believe it is very important. Now, just like my MP, I will stand up and I will commend the Government on bringing this legislation. Anyone who knows me and knows me in my history of time with the Progressive Labour Party from when I first came back in 2003, one of the things that I always spoke about was immigration policy and how I did not believe that we did a good enough job on immigration policy. And I remember in public forums, I made it clear and I said that if we did a better job, we may not be on this side of the benches. And it is something that we hear on the doorstep often; it is something that I heard on the doorstep often. So I commend the Government for bringing this legislation, and I hope that they will go further. Immigration abuse is certainly a problem. Work permit abuse is certainly a problem that we have that exists, and it is something that we must crack down on. This is a start. I would like to see more. And I would like to also ask the Minister just a quick ques-tion as to why he felt that it was too draconian, as he said, to have on- the-spot ticketing and a name and shame list? I think that if you are going to go forward, you might want to push there. And I guess I was sur-prised to hear that it was too draconian. So I will wait to hear that [answer]. But also what I will say, Mr. Speaker, is that it is all good to pass laws. But the proof will be in the execution. And I look forward to hearing about people that are actually getting civil penalties, and making sure that this new legislation that we are amending tonight will be enforced. But I hope that the Minister will answer that question. And I would like to commend the Government again. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. Are there any other Members who would care to speak? Minister, you would like to reply? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I do not know if it is the legislation or it is the early time in the morning that we are all …
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberIt is always the legislation. You know that. It is always the legislation. Quit while you are ahead. [Laughter] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, I think the congratulations should go out to the Minister who has been under some pressure for some of the initiatives he has made. And …
It is always the legislation. You know that. It is always the legislation. Quit while you are ahead.
[Laughter]
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, I think the congratulations should go out to the Minister who has been under some pressure for some of the initiatives he has made. And I think time has proven that he has made the right decisions. So, thank you to the Minister and the Chief Immigration Officer for the work they have done. You know, this is a real strong piece of legislation , and I think the measures that we have in here are strong enough to start the foundation of what we have to do. House of Assembly 2294 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
I just will remark for a brief moment, Mr. Speaker, that I think this piece of legislation will allow people to shed some of the fear they have about speaking out. Quite frequently, when people call me and complain about immigration matters, I say, Have you called the department? And they say, No, no, no! I wouldn’t do that. But I think, now that they see that there is a framework around for allowing them to have a voice and to have some protection, I think they will feel comfortable speaking out, Mr. Speaker. And that is up to us to help that, moving forward. But certainly, with the two pieces of legislation we have seen, the one preceding this and this one here, Mr. Speaker, I now think that our moral compass is readily back in full flight. So I would like to thank Honourable Members for contributing to this debate today, Mr. Speaker. And I move that the Bill be com-mitted.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. Are there any objections to the Bill being committed? There are none. I would like to ask that the Deputy Speaker please take the Chair [of Committee]. [Pause] House in Committee at 3:23 am [28 September 2013] [Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Chairman] COMMITTEE ON BILL BERMUDA IMMIGRATION …
The ChairmanChairmanHonourable Members, we are now in Committee of the whole [House] for further consider ation of the Bill entitled the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013 . I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Ministe r, you have the floor. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank …
Honourable Members, we are now in Committee of the whole [House] for further consider ation of the Bill entitled the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013 . I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Ministe r, you have the floor. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would like to move all clauses. [Pause] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Okay. I will move clauses 1 [through] 7.
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Clause 1 is self -explanatory. Clause 2 amends section 57 of the principal Act to insert a definition of “work permit.” Work permit was previously not defined in the principal Act, and for clarity it has now been added to definitions. Clause 3 amends section 61 of the principal Act to clarify that the employer must make work permit application on behalf of the prospective employee and is responsible for ensuring that the application is complete and accurate in accordance with guidelines is-sued by the Minister for the purposes of this section. Madam Chairman, work permit applications are at times completed on behalf of the company by an agency. The amendment makes it clear that the employer is accountable for the application’s accur acy. Guideline s that assist employers in assuming r esponsibility for the accuracy of their submissions, to include the level of the document, checks that must be undertaken to ensure accuracy and completeness, will be produced to support this provision. Madam Chairman, section 61(7) is set out in full, for clarity, so readers will no longer need to look back at section 34(2) -(4), which was previously applied by the two provisos to section 61(7). The redraft of section 61(7) is a housekeeping matter for the ease of reference. Subsection (7E) clarifies that when the employment comes to an end as a result of a work permit expiring, or is revoked due to early termination by either the employer or the employee, there is no appeal to the Immigration Appeals Tribunal. Clause 4(1) inserts new section 61AA and 61AB into the principal Act. Section 61AA provides that a work permit will not be granted to an exceptio nal person. Madam Chairman, an “exceptional person” is defined in section 31(7) of the principal Act. Section 31(7) defines exceptional person as, amongst other things, a person suffering from a mental disorder, communicable disease or is destitute, previously r emoved or repatriated without reimbursing Gover nment, arrived in Bermuda for immoral purposes, was convicted of an offence punishable in Bermuda with imprisonment with a term of two years or more, one who is on the stop list, or remains or resides in Ber-muda after being a bona fide visitor wherein the term has expired. Section 61AB provides that the most recent employ er of a person whose work permit has ended is responsible for any costs associated with repatriation of the person and his or her qualifying dependents. The Act includes a provision that, wherein a pre-existing contract between the employer exists, the employer is relieved of the repatriation responsibilities. Notwithstanding wherein the employer cannot bear the expense, however, the repatriation costs remain the responsibility of the employer. The Government will not be liable for the associated costs. The e mployer, however, is not responsible for the repatriation of non- qualifying dependents. These are persons wherein the dependents were not listed on the apHouse of Assembly
proved work permit application. Examples would be births, adoptions, marriages or legal guardians. The guidelines and the work permit applic ations will make it perfectly clear to the employee that if their dependent situation changes for whatever rea-son, the employee must inform the Department of Immigration. In accordance with section 30(2) and sectio n 30E [sic], the department can apply saf eguards to ensure adequate funds are maintained for repatriation or deportation of non- qualifying dependents. Subsection 2 makes a related minor amendment to section 31(7) of the principal Act, exceptional persons, to remove unnecessary and discriminatory words from [section 31(7)](e). Clause 5 inserts the new civil penalty scheme, in section 71A to 71C. [New] section 71A provides, The Chief Immigration Officer may impose a civil pen-alty of $5,000 (or $10,000 for a second or subsequent violation) on a person who works without or outside the scope of his permit, or employs a person to do that, and on a person who is being investigated for suspected contravention and fails to submit specified documentation. Where a civil penalty is imposed on a person under section 71A, he shall not also be pros ecuted for a criminal offence under section 64, 65, 133 or 134 of the principal Act relating to that same con-travention. During the past two years, Madam Chairman, there have been four cases wherein persons have appeared before the courts related to work permit vi olations. The Chief Immigration Officer will maintain the ability to seek direction for criminal proceedings via the Director of Public Prosecutions. In addition, the Chief Immigration Officer also maintains the ability to issue warnings, where appropriate, as opposed to a fine. [New] section 71B sets out the procedure to be followed before a civil penalty is imposed. The cr eation of civil penalties is meant to serve as a deterrent in the first instance. Individuals and employers who commit offences against the Act will be treated fairly and with due diligence when determining if there is a violation. [New] section 71C provides for an appeal to the Supreme Court against a decision to impose a penalty. Notwithstanding the Immigration Appeals Tr ibunal, that hears appeals relative to the decisions of the Minister specific to outcomes of various applic ations, appeals decisions relative to the contravention of the Act will be referred directly to the courts. This sets and/or maintains a clear line of demarcation b etween the roles of the two bodies. The Department of Immigration currently has the resources, reporting lines and established protocol for investigation and determi ning work permit violation. The civil penalties regime is based on the application of the natural jus-tice process that allows a person to make a represen-tation before a violation and a penalty decision is made. Subject to a decision by the Chief Immigration Officer, an aggrieved party may then appeal to the Supreme Court. Clause 6, Madam Chairman, amends section 111 of the principal Act by inserting new subsection (3A), which provides that a person’s former employer shall be responsible for the deportation expenses of the employee and any qualifying dependents not co vered by the monies referred to in [section 111](3). The deportation provision is similar to the repatriation pr ovision, wherein the employer bears responsibility. Over the past two years, nine persons have been de-ported from Bermuda. This provision ensures that deportation expenses for a person on a work permit and their qualifying dependents can be recovered from employers. Clause 7, Madam Chairman, amends section 141 of the principal Act to increase the criminal pena lties for offences under the Act from $5,000 to $10,000 for a summary conviction, and $10,000 to $25,000 for a second conviction. Madam Chairman, I might want to just say here that we need to correct the Explanatory Mem orandum at the back, because it mistakenly refers to summary and indictable offences rather than first and second offences. Section 136 clarifies that these offences are all summary offences. So I think what we can do, without an amendment, we can just correct that before we send it down to the Senate. Those are the first seven clauses, Madam Chairman.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: It is not part of the Bill, but we should correct it for the record. If you go to the E xplanatory Memorandum under clause 7.
The ChairmanChairmanCorrect, yes. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: It says, “Amends section 141 of the principal Act to increase the penalties for offences under the Act, from $5,000 to $10,000.” That should read, for a first conviction, and from $10,000 t o $25,000 for the second offence.
The ChairmanChairmanCorrect. Thank you. [Crosstalk]
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 through 7 of the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises Mr. C. Walton Brown, Shadow Minister of Education. You have the floor. House of Assembly 2296 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Madam Chairman. Just a quick question. What happens in the situation —I believe it is clause 6— on the issue of r epatriation if the company has gone out of business?
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Finance. David G. Burt, you have the floor.
Mr. E. David Bur tThank you. Madam Chairman. Just to ask the Minister, because I did not hear the answer during his general debate, he had mentioned two things that were considered in the Bill. I am just wondering why they were not there. And I can just specifically refer to clause 5, where …
Thank you. Madam Chairman. Just to ask the Minister, because I did not hear the answer during his general debate, he had mentioned two things that were considered in the Bill. I am just wondering why they were not there. And I can just specifically refer to clause 5, where it talks about the power to impose civil penalties for work permit violations, why there was the decision to exclude ticketing, even though it was recommended, and why the decision to also not have name and shame? Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill? The Chair recognises Mr. Walter H. Roban, Shadow Minister of Home Affairs. You have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanJust for the record, irrespective of the questions that the Honourable Members are posing, I do not have any real substantive questions. I am just waiting for the amendment to be dealt with.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Minister? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Chairman. In regards to the question from the Honour able Member, MP Walton Brown, it is a good question. It does not happen in very many cases at all. And if the company has gone out of business, typic ally …
Thank you. Minister? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Chairman. In regards to the question from the Honour able Member, MP Walton Brown, it is a good question. It does not happen in very many cases at all. And if the company has gone out of business, typic ally what would happen is the employees have gone before that. So, they would be taken care of. However, in a circumstance where the employees might be seeking alternate employment and the company that they last worked for goes out of business, then there would be a challenge. And in that case, Government would have to pay for the deportation. In regards to ever -persistent MP, the Honourable Shadow Finance Minister Burt, in connection with the name and shame register, this did present some constitutional issues. And so, the Chief Immigration Officers will keep a list internally on that. In regard to your spot ticketing, I think you also asked, it did not allow for the natural justice process to take place.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 through 7? There are no other Members. Minister? PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 8 Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Chairman. At this stage, I would like to move the amendment. And I believe I …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 through 7? There are no other Members. Minister?
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 8
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Chairman. At this stage, I would like to move the amendment. And I believe I did give a copy to the Shadow. The Sergeant -at-Arms will be giving it out.
The ChairmanChairmanYou will be moving just clause 8? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Just clause 8, correct.
The ChairmanChairmanYou can address it now. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you. I move that the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013 be amended as follows: Delete clause 8 and substitute, “Whistleblowers” 1. In section 29A(2) of the Employment Act 2000 (whistle -blowers), at the end, insert — …
You can address it now. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you. I move that the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013 be amended as follows: Delete clause 8 and substitute, “Whistleblowers” 1. In section 29A(2) of the Employment Act 2000 (whistle -blowers), at the end, insert — “(n) the Chief Immigration Officer of the Department of Immigration.”; and 2. In section 3(3) of the Good Governance Act 2012 (offence of terminating contract with, or withholding payment from, a whistle- blower), at the end, insert — “(m) the Chief Immigration Officer of the Department of Immigr ation.”
This simply adds the Chief Immigration Officer as a whistle- blower to the Good Governance Act [2012], Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members that would like to speak to the amendment? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Shadow Minister of Home Affairs. You have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanYes, we just wish to certainly give our approval to this. It is obviously a more co mprehensive measure and includes all of the legislation that would give the whole opportunity of effective whistle -blowing and governance around the provisions to be more complete. So I just wish to give …
Yes, we just wish to certainly give our approval to this. It is obviously a more co mprehensive measure and includes all of the legislation that would give the whole opportunity of effective whistle -blowing and governance around the provisions to be more complete. So I just wish to give our a pproval, and have no objections to it at all.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. House of Assembly Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the amendment? All those Members in favour of the motion, please, say Aye. All those opposed, please, say Nay. AYES.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Ayes have it. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Amendment to clause 8 passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister, please proceed. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Clause 9 provides for the commencement and application of the new provisions. The new provisions will come into effect on a date to be determined by the Minister of Home Affairs by notice in the official G azette. During …
Minister, please proceed.
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Clause 9 provides for the commencement and application of the new provisions. The new provisions will come into effect on a date to be determined by the Minister of Home Affairs by notice in the official G azette. During the interim period, the department will work collaboratively with the industry to establish codes and guidelines, and engage in training.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members that would like to speak to clause 9? There are no Members that would like to speak to clause 9. Minister? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: I move the Preamble, with that correction in the Explanatory Memorandum.
The ChairmanChairmanYou have to move the clauses. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: I move all clauses, 1 [through] 9.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 1 [through] 9 be approved. Are there any objections to that motion?
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberAs amended.
The ChairmanChairmanAs amended. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley : As amended, yes. And I move the Preamble. And just as a r eminder for that correction in the—
The ChairmanChairmanWe are going to get there —first. No objections? Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clauses 1 through 9 passed, as amended.]
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the proposed amendment to clause 8 — Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Corrections. The proposed corrections. No, the correction in the Explanatory Memorandum.
The ChairmanChairmanThat is not part of the Bill. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Okay.
The ChairmanChairmanBe approved. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Gavel] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: I move the Bill be reported to the House.
The ChairmanChairmanPreamble? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: I already did that. I move the Preambl e.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Preamble be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Gavel] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: I move the Bill be reported to the House.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Bil l be reported to the House, as amended. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. The Bill will be reported to the House with amendment. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Bermuda Immigration and Pr otection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013 was consi …
It has been moved that the Bil l be reported to the House, as amended. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. The Bill will be reported to the House with amendment. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Bermuda Immigration and Pr otection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013 was consi dered by a Committee of the whole House, and passed as amended in clause 8.] [ Pause]
House resumed at 3:40 am [28 September 2013]
[Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair]
House of Assembly 2298 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
REPORT OF COMMITTEE
BERMUDA IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION AMENDMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2013
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Second Reading of the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act has been approved, with amendment. We now move to the next Order of the day, which is the Second Reading of the Insurance Amendment Act 2013, in the name of the Minister of Finance. Minister Bob Richards, …
The Second Reading of the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act has been approved, with amendment. We now move to the next Order of the day, which is the Second Reading of the Insurance Amendment Act 2013, in the name of the Minister of Finance. Minister Bob Richards, you have the floor.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move that the Bill entitled the Insurance Amendment Act 2013 be now read the second time and committed.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. Are there any objections? There are none. Carry on, Minister. BILL SECOND READING INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT 2013 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure this evening (or this morning) to present the Bill, the Insurance Amendment Act 2013. This Bill is intended to …
Thank you, Minister. Are there any objections? There are none. Carry on, Minister.
BILL
SECOND READING
INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT 2013 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure this evening (or this morning) to present the Bill, the Insurance Amendment Act 2013. This Bill is intended to streamline the provisions that allow a member of a group to make material changes and those changes being approved by the Bermuda Mone tary Authority as group supervisor. Mr. Speaker, effective group supervision is increasingly critical to the continuous success of Ber-muda’s risk industry, and a significant part of the A uthority’s duties as regulator and as part of its role, the Authority must be informed of changes. For these purposes, material changes include: • amalgamation with another firm; • engaging in unrelated retail business; • acquisition of a controlling interest in a bus iness that is not insurance; • outsourcing all or a material part of actuarial risk management compliance or internal aud it functions; and • outsourcing all or a material part of an insurer’s underwriting activity.
This regulatory requirement was introduced three years ago with the aim of enabling the Authority to gauge the impact of material change and how they will be managed by a group. Mr. Speaker, under the Insurance Act 1978, a group is required to ensure that any change to be effected by a member of a group be approved by the Authority, except where the member is regulated by a competent authority in another juri sdiction, a competent authority of equal equivalency. Under those circumstances, the process is different, with only a notification required. Developed after consultation with the insurance industry, this Bill to amend the Insurance Act 1978 removes the requirement for a group to seek the Authority’s approval for a material change. Instead, the amending legislation requires that the group not ifies the Authority in writing the changes that have been effected by a group member. Seeking approval does take time and does have an impact on the group’s overall operation and efficiencies. To ensure that the proposed streamlining does not compromise regulatory efficiency or under-mine supervisory intent, the Authority has reviewed international requirements and determined that the key factor to maintaining our high- quality risk -adjusted supervisory regime is to have timely information and ready access to other regulators in order to assess the impact of any change. However, access is discr etionary, and Bermuda’s strong international relations with insurance supervisors around the world will be critical to the success of this process. Mr. Speaker, Bermuda has been recognised as being compliant with international standards set down by the International Association of Insurance Supervisors (commonly known as IAIS) and is conti nuously involved in the development of such standards. In recent years, standards have been devised dealing with the oversight of groups. This step has been taken to better oversee how groups themselves are go verned and has been of particular importance since the financial crisis in order to determine the effect of groups on financial stability. Bermuda has been dil igent in our efforts to implement a regulatory regime of groups, and there are now 22 groups for which Bermuda has been recognised internationally as group supervisor. Mr. Speaker, the regime for dealing with m aterial changes by members of groups has been under review. It has been determined that other approaches may be taken to ensure that the Authority, as group supervisor, is informed about material changes and makes its regulatory assessments without requiring the member to seek approval. Furthermore assessing whether a jurisdiction is equivalent because it has laws similar to those in Bermuda is not easily deter-mined, as the group regime is new and other jurisdic-tions have not developed, or are in the process of put-ting in place, the necessary laws. For these reasons, the Authority seeks to modify the regime. It is proposed the same process will apply to all groups, and the designated insurer of a group should inform the Authority of material chang-es within 14 days, and to remove the requirement for a “no objection” statement. By taking a uniform apHouse of Assembly
proach for all groups to report changes in 14 days, the Authority will have the information in a sufficiently timely manner to make any further inquiries and follow up with a group member and its own country regulator about any concerns. With this approach, the Authority remains i nformed about significant changes and is able to take appropriate actions, if any, as required, and comply with the international standards and exceptions. Mr. Speaker, Bermuda is well aware that effective insurance regulation and supervision is vital to the success of its international insurance industry. But we are also aware that international regulation is often duplicative and that the cost of maintaining this regime is borne by the industry. The Insurance Amendment Act 2013 reflects in part an effort to take full ad-vantage of the work being carried out by international supervisors in jurisdictions that share our commitment to quality risk -based supervision. Mr. Speaker, Bermuda is ranked in the top 10 per cent of regulators, according to the World Bank’s Governance Indicator report. If Bermuda is to remain attractive to new business, it must remain dil igent in tackling redundant supervisory practices, lo wering supervisory costs wherever possible and remov-ing unnecessary hurdles that could undermine our advantage as a jurisdiction favoured for its ability to provide exceptional speed to market. Mr. Speaker, Bermuda remains well pos itioned for our global recognition of its insurance framework, including Solvency II equivalence, while pragmatically building in appropriate provisions and time for firms to transition to key regime enhanc ements. Mr. Speaker, the Authority has registered 51 new insurers for the period ending August 31 st, 2013. There are currently 1,223 insurers registered in Ber-muda, as compared to 1,209 insurers registered as at December 2012. Mr. Speaker, while special- purpose insurers continue to dominate new registrations, the total number of captives and Class 4 reinsurers and insurers remains steady. Mr. Speaker, one of the Government’s key objectives is to position Bermuda as the partner and investment destination of choice for financial services. Members are advised that insurance financial activ ities between Bermuda and Europe grew from $140 billion in the year 2000 to $438 billion in 2011. In 2010, Bermuda was ranked as the most important export market for insurance services and the most important foreign supplier of insurance and reinsur-ance to the United States, averaging $30 billion annu-ally in payments or as much as $35 billion annually in recover ed losses, according to the 2012 Bermuda & World Economy Report. For Bermuda to win the f uture, how we position ourselves in other markets will also be key. Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the efforts of the Bermuda Monetary Authority, the Attor-ney General’s Chambers and the Association of Bermuda Insurers and Reinsurers (ABIR) for their contr ibutions to this Bill. Mr. Speaker, I recommend that this Bill be referred to Committee at this time.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Minister. The Chair now recognises the . . . I will reco gnise you when your colleague gets out of the way. Yes. I recognise the Honourable Shadow Minister of Finance. I gave you time to get out of the way.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIt is Speaker. Mr. Speaker. [Laughter]
Mr. E. David BurtGood morning, Mr. Speaker. I do not even know what time it is now. Anyhow, Mr. Speaker, as much as I would like to wax eloquently about this amendment and the wonderful work of the Bermuda Monetary Aut hority and the different things which they do to make sure that …
Good morning, Mr. Speaker. I do not even know what time it is now. Anyhow, Mr. Speaker, as much as I would like to wax eloquently about this amendment and the wonderful work of the Bermuda Monetary Aut hority and the different things which they do to make sure that we preserve our leadership position in the insur-ance industry, I would just say that I concur with the Minister’s comments on his brief, and he has the full support of this side of the House. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. Does any other Member care to speak? The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the Honourable Member’s remarks, and I move that the House now go into Committee.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Are there any objections to that? I would like to ask the Deputy Speaker . . . [Pause] House in Committee at 3:53 am [Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Chairman] COMMITTEE ON BILL INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT 2 013
The ChairmanChairmanHonourable Members, we are now in Committee of the whole [House] for further consider ation of the Bill entitled Insurance Amendment Act 2013 . I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister, you have the floor. House of Assembly 2300 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report Hon. E. …
Honourable Members, we are now in Committee of the whole [House] for further consider ation of the Bill entitled Insurance Amendment Act 2013 . I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister, you have the floor. House of Assembly 2300 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I would like to move all clauses, clauses 1 through 4, at this point. Clause 1 is the citation, provides the citation for the Bill. Clause 2 amends section 27A of the principal Act in the definition of “competent authority” so as to provide that the term applies to any regulatory author ity rather than just to a national authority, as currently provided in the principal Act. The objective of this amendment is to substitute the current, limited defin ition of “competent authority” with a definition that i ncorporates all regulatory authorities, including state authorities. Madam Chairman, clause 3 amends section 30JB of the principal Act to remove the requirement for a designated insurer to notify the Authority of a material change to be effected by a member of the group before the member may undertake the change, unless the member is regulated by a competent authority in an equivalent jurisdiction, and replaces it with a uniform requirement for a designated insurer to notify the Authority of a material change made by a member of the group. The clause further repeals sec-tion 30JB(3) and repeals and replaces 30JB(4) to now only require the insurer, other than a member of a designated insurer, to seek approval by the Authority of material change. Madam Chairman, clause 4 amends section 30JC of the principal Act, in the first instance so as to exclude the insurance group from persons who may be threatened by a material change made under sec-tion 30JB, a circumstance that would require the A uthority to object to the material change proposed. The clause further amends the section to exclude the i nsurance group from persons to whom the material change is not to affect their compliance with the prov isions of the Act. Those are all the clauses, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members that would like to speak to clauses 1 through 4? The Chair recognizes Mr. E. David G. Burt, Shadow Minister of Finance. You have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtMadam Chairman, as much as I would like to move an amendment, this side of the House supports the clauses as read by the Minister.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Minister? Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, so I now move that clauses 1 through 4 be approved.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 1 through 4 be approved. Are there any objections to that m otion? [A Member sneezed loudly.]
The ChairmanChairmanWas that an objection? [Laughter]
The ChairmanChairmanNo objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I move the Preamble.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Preamble be approved. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I move that the Bill be reported to the House.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House, as p rinted. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. [Motion carried: The Insurance Amendment Act 2013 was considered by a Committee of the …
It has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House, as p rinted. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. [Motion carried: The Insurance Amendment Act 2013 was considered by a Committee of the whole House and passed wit hout amendment.]
House resumed at 3:57 am [28 September 2013]
[Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair] [Pause]
REPORT OF COMMITTEE
INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT 2013
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMembers, the Bill, the Insurance Amendment Act 2013, Second Readi ng, has been approved. The next Order is the Customs Tariff Act, which is carried over. The Second Reading of the Cruise Ship Cas ino Act is carried over. House of Assembly The Second Reading of the Municipalities Amendment Act …
Members, the Bill, the Insurance Amendment Act 2013, Second Readi ng, has been approved. The next Order is the Customs Tariff Act, which is carried over. The Second Reading of the Cruise Ship Cas ino Act is carried over. House of Assembly
The Second Reading of the Municipalities Amendment Act is carried over. The Second Reading of the Corporation of St. George’s Act is carried over. The next matter is a motion to be moved by Minister Dunkley.
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, I move the following motion, which notice was given on the 13th of September 2013: “In an effort to ensur e that Bermuda’s Legisl ature meets the highest standards of governance for democratic legislatures and in order to lead by example; be it resolved that this Honourable House a pproves and adopts a mandatory random drug testing policy for Members of the Legislature and that a Joint Select Committee be appointed to consider and de-termine the specifics, implementation and monitoring of the said Policy.”
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member. Any Members objecting to that motion?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerToo late. It is not a good enough objection. [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister, carry on, please. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the motion before this Honour able House this morning seeks approval of H onourable Members for mandatory random drug testing of the Legislature, and further that a Joint Select Committee be set up to appoint and …
Minister, carry on, please.
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the motion before this Honour able House this morning seeks approval of H onourable Members for mandatory random drug testing of the Legislature, and further that a Joint Select Committee be set up to appoint and devise all aspects of this pol-icy. Mr. Speaker, the motion has a potential to put Bermuda on the democratic map as a leader in the area of zero tolerance for drug use in positions of trust and authority. Mr. Speaker, you are well aware that most private sector companies in several sensitive areas in the public sector already do drug testing of employees. It is therefore logical that we as public ser vants first and foremost should be glad to lead by ex-ample. Mr. Speaker, we believe this motion is devoid of politics and should not divide us along partisan p olitical lines. It proposes a measure of good gover nance that is the natural progression of things, like the Register of Members’ Interest and of the oaths that we all took before serving in this Honourable Chamber. Mr. Speaker, to introduce this motion it may be useful for Honourable Members and the public for me to t race the short history which has led us to this point. Honourable Members will recall that in the Go vernment’s first Throne Speech of February this year we made the following commitment and promise: “The use of illicit drugs in Bermuda is a problem that could benefit from some leadership by example. The Gov-ernment will, therefore, implement a policy whereby all Government Members of the Legislature will be su bject to random, mandatory drug testing. A paper out-lining the policy details will be released short ly. Me mbers of the Opposition will be invited to participate.” Well, Mr. Speaker, in the six months since that promise to Bermuda the Ministry of Public Safety through the Department of National Drug Control has researched and considered best practice methodology to apply to this proposal. I am pleased to advise Hon-ourable Members that pending the approval and the appointment of the Joint Select Committee, I intend to supply the Committee with the research conducted, which should prove helpful in the work on this policy. Mr. Speaker, Honourable Members will also recall that in my statement to this Honourable House on the 26 th of July, I indicated that a policy had been approved by Cabinet and Government’s Parliamen-tary caucus and that we would shortly be posting on the One Bermuda Alliance website. Mr. Speaker, we deferred on implementing this aspect of the matters after fuller consultation with your office—the Office of the Speaker. Let me recognise the helpful advice, Mr. Speaker, that your office has provided which commended to the Government the importance of extending the policy to all Members of the Legislature. To further ensure bi -partisan application in the management of this policy, the appointment of a Joint Select Committee will serve to strengthen the confidence of the public in our ability to represent them. Mr. Speaker, the jurisdictional review co nducted as part of our research into this area indicated that several legislatures have talked about drug tes ting their members. In fact, Mr. Speaker, it may su rprise some Honourable Members to know that this Honourable House considered this very issue in June 2000. At that time, Mr. Speaker, the then- Leader of the Opposition, the former Honourable Member Dame Pamela Gordon, introduced a motion that sought to have Members submit to random drug testing no less than twice per year. Mr. Speaker, the motion was eventually amended by the then- Premier the Honourable Member Dame Jennifer Smith to include the a ppointment of the Committee to implement the policy. Mr. Speaker, the Journals of the House of A ssembly indicate that the amendment was made at 2:33 am on 11 August 2000. As is often the case with things said and done at that hour, it does not appear that any committee was struck, and no progress was made on the implementation of this policy in spite of an effort from the former Honourable Member, John Barritt, in December 2000 to have a committee ap-pointed within 30 days. Mr. Speaker, I am sure that House of Assembly 2302 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
with the support of the Members of the Legislature early this morning— even with the early hours of this morning, and working through all of yesterday and this morning—this will not be the case this time. Mr. Speaker, in the United States the issue in recent times has been connected to the suggestion that drug testing be implemented for those who would seek to qualify for benefits and assistance under Go vernment programmes. Honourable Members will not be surprised to learn that attempts to make such a proposal law have actually failed in those states that attempted it. In one well -publicised instance a measure to make welfare recipients subject to mandatory drug testing failed because a provision was added to include members of the state legislature in question. It would seem, Mr. Speaker, that what was good for the goose was eventually not so good for the gander. Mr. Speaker, I use this example as an indic ation of this Government’s core belief that there is power in the symbolism and that we must be prepared to surrender ourselves in service to the people. There is no suggestion, Mr. Speaker, of any extension to the drug testing regime beyond what we are discussing today. High risk and safety sensitive areas within the public service already conduct drug testing and there exists well -oiled machinery in place to help t hose who test positive and to ensure the safety of those for whom they are responsible in their work. Mr. Speaker, Honourable Members may be interested to know that the issue of drug testing polit icians has made its way to the United States Supreme Court. In 1997, a candidate for Lieutenant Governor in Georgia successfully sued to strike down a Georgia law that required all politicians to be tested for drugs before being allowed on the ballot. That case , Mr. Speaker, was based on the Fourth Amendment —a constitutional point against unreasonable searches and the plaintiff’s belief that there should be some limit to suspicion- less drug testing. The candidate pr evailed in this point, but the case’s application to what is proposed by this motion is limited. Our proposal, Mr. Speaker, is that this applies to those already elected or appointed to serve and we are not passing any statute which affects the ability of an individual Member to continue in service to his or her constituents. This is a symbolic measure directed at strengthening our good governance on behalf of the people that we represent. Mr. Speaker, whilst not covered specifically by this motio n I think it is necessary to acknowledge the public debate in Bermuda and overseas that surrounds the use of marijuana. Without going into too much detail in this matter, I do feel it is important to signal to this Honourable House that we are prepared to begin a meaningful discussion on the decriminalis ation of marijuana in Bermuda. Likewise, Mr. Speaker, we do not support legislation for the legalisation of this drug as we are not convinced that such a course is fit and proper for the Island. We take notice of the effect that a conviction for the youthful indiscretion of mar ijuana possession can have on our citizens and with that in mind a wider discussion on decriminalisation must take place. Additionally, Mr. Speaker, there is some m omentum surrounding the medical uses of marijuana and the relief that proponents say it brings to the sufferers of various diseases. This discussion cannot be discounted either and must also form part of a sens ible, mature, public discussion on these issues. Mr. Speaker, one only needs to read the newspapers, watch the news, or go on the Internet to see that in CARICOM, the UK, the United States, and throughout much of the world they are considering their positions on marijuana. We have nothing to fear. Such a discussion local ly would be healthy and I wish to ensure the people of Bermuda that our decisions will be research- driven and made in the best interests of the Island as a whole. Mr. Speaker, in an era where we speak about personal responsibility and at every turn encourage young people in particular to make positive life- style choices, the implementation of a drug testing regime for Members of this Legislature makes Bermuda a trailblazing parliamentary democracy. We are not just talking the talk, but we can show that we are prepared to walk the walk. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to commend this motion to the Honourable House for debate amongst Members. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now recognises the Honourable Member MP Walton Brown, the Shadow Minister for Education. You have the floor.
Mr. Walton BrownA very good man. Dr. Archibald was invited by the Government in 1990 to develop the National Drug Strategy for Bermuda. I was the principal research office for the National Drug Strategy, Mr. Speaker, and then I went on to become the research officer for the National Drug Commission. So …
A very good man. Dr. Archibald was invited by the Government in 1990 to develop the National Drug Strategy for Bermuda. I was the principal research office for the National Drug Strategy, Mr. Speaker, and then I went on to become the research officer for the National Drug Commission. So I do not speak on this matter as someone who is new to the issue of drugs and t he harm that it does to society. One of the principles under which Dr. Arch ibald developed the National Drug Strategy was based on the notion of harm reduction, that the philosophical underpinning to the development of the National Strategy for the Island was focused around harm r eduction. So you tried to minimise the harm that the use of drugs —both licit and illicit —caused to the soc iety. And we saw policy develop from that. We have seen drug testing policies in place for certain sensitive areas of business and gover nance, where safety is involved, for example, hospitals and airlines. And it makes perfect sense to do so, Mr. Speaker, because you are putting the lives of people at stake if they are working under the influence of any drug, whether it be lic it or illicit. And so it makes sense. When it comes to other areas where the issue of safety is not involved, then you have to pose the question, what is the purpose of having a drug policy in place? Is it designed to identify and to dismiss those who are using certain drugs? Is it designed to provide assistance to those who are using certain drugs? Or is it designed for some other purpose? So one has to be clear about what the purpose is when one develops a drug policy. Mr. Speaker, on this issue in Berm uda we know that the drug that is abused more than any other drug is alcohol. It causes more harm to society than any other drug. So if we are looking at creating som ething comprehensive, the first question would be, will you look at the use of alcohol? There is a structural bias I guess in any drug testing programme because alcohol tends not to stay in the system for very long periods of time—12 hours or so—and it is out of your system. So you could be an alcoholic, have recurring issues of performance and productivity, but if you just can wait the 12 hours or so it will not be found in your system at all. When it comes to a drug like marijuana it can stay in your system for sometimes months, depending on the testing modality. If you are testing the hair f ollicles it can be there for months. Now I am not sure what the objective is by the Government bringing forth this motion —I am not sure. If it has to do with ensuring good governance, then I would have thought there would have been a much broader scope of things for us to look at than simply the drugs, Mr. Speaker. If they are concerned with the legality of drugs then we need to be clear also about what the Government is attempting to do because I could go to Amsterdam tomorrow, Mr. Speaker, as you know, I could go into Amsterdam for 30 years and I can go to a coffee shop—
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Walton Brown—the Honourable Minister asks why . . . because I happened to have been married to someone who spent half her life in Amsterdam. I have very c lose friends and family in Amsterdam and I go there on a regular basis. There are other attractions, as well, Mr. Speaker, …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerDo not take me to those other attractions.
Mr. Walton Brown—extend to a level we do not want it to be at. But Mr. Speaker, I could legitimately go to a coffee shop, have a joint —smoke a joint —come back and test positive and prove what? I would have committed no crime in Bermuda. I would have committed no …
—extend to a level we do not want it to be at. But Mr. Speaker, I could legitimately go to a coffee shop, have a joint —smoke a joint —come back and test positive and prove what? I would have committed no crime in Bermuda. I would have committed no crime in Bermuda, but depending on the type of policy that is put in place, I would either be named or shamed or be asked to go into treatment. So I am just trying to get clarity on this. The vast majority of people who use marijuana, which seems to be the illegal drug of choice in Bermuda, the vast majority of people who use marijuana in this country do so on a casual basis, that is what . . . recreational. That is what my research shows. So are you saying that people who do use this for recreational purposes need to go into treatment? Of course not. That cannot be sensible policy. No one needs to go into treatment for that purpose. There is a small m inority who do become overly . . . who become phys ically dependent and will necessarily require treatment. So I just need to get clarity on what the purpose is of this particular motion. Is it to coerce people to go into treatment? Is it to name and shame? What then, is the purpose? I go back to the report of Dr. Archibald because he wrote a report in 1991, and out of that developed the National Drug Strategy. And then two years later we had Justice Stephen Tumin who put out the report . . . my honourable colleague can tell me. Stephen Tumin did a report on . . .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPrisons. House of Assembly 2304 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
Mr. Walton BrownPrisons, yes. And in that report he made the point that Bermuda is far too punitive a society. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Walton BrownAnd that we needed to find ways to become less punitive— [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Walton BrownA penal colony. And so all I simply say to the Government is, can you provide us with a rationale for bringing for-ward this [motion] other than something which says that it has to do with good governance? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now recognises the Honourable and Learned Attorney General, Mark Pettingill. You have the floor. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And good morning to my honourable colleagues and to all of the listening public out there that have stayed up …
All right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now recognises the Honourable and Learned Attorney General, Mark Pettingill. You have the floor. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And good morning to my honourable colleagues and to all of the listening public out there that have stayed up late to hear this speech and the others that are going on. I say that somewhat tongue- in-cheek, Mr. Speaker, because it is late, but this is an important topic and I would be remiss if I did not rise on it b ecause anybody that knows me, and certainly Members on the other side do and my honourable col-leagues on this side know that I am a pretty liberal guy. And you know I am the one that has been, you know, was about equal rights, two words and a comma—I advocated that. It is funny because I have kind of said, You know, I am the Attorney General that has advocated equal rights for all people, gay rights. I have advocated, if you will, like in the liberalising of marijuana laws and I am an advocate for gaming, and I do not really do any of those things or any of them at all, per se. The point is this, that I have wrestled with this issue about drugs and from a liberal standpoint I have looked at many, many models in doing my research. In Portugal, they legalised drugs and their crime rate went down. That is something to look at. You hear that and you go, Wow, they legalised all drugs — effectively —and then their crime rate dropped exponentially. And we know in this society that the use of marijuana particularly is a common drug of choice, commonly used by many, many people. And we would have our heads in the sand if we said that it was not. So everybody will start talking about legal-ised marijuana. But this is the problem when we make a comparative analysis with alcohol. Alcohol is very strictly regulated in the way that it is produced, in the way that it is sold, in the way that it is imported, in the way that it is served, and in the way that it is regulated. And it took a long time to get to that, Mr. Speaker. Now you could look at that and say, Back in the days of Prohibition it was a nonsense because alcohol was illegal, but everybody was still drinking. It caused all of these problems. And anybody that watches Boardwalk Empire (I love that show) can see how much violence went on around alcohol. And then some people will pitch the same argument with regard to marijuana and other drugs t oday. Some people would even say it is part of the is-sues we have had in this country with regard to gang violence that ties in with marijuana. And people will say, Well, if you legalise it, you wouldn’t have that problem. But this is the problem. It is not just that easy to do because when people start talking about legali sing it you have to say, Well, where do you get it from? How do you quality control it? How do you regulate it? And maybe there are answers to all of those questions because some places have that. The Honourable Member talks about Amsterdam and I have been to Amsterdam before and I know there are coffee shops in Amsterdam. I have seen those. I am not ashamed to say I have been in a coffee shop in Amsterdam. I know what . . . and how they have done it. But it is not quite as simple as it seems. And the regulation is not just weed is not just legal in Amsterdam —that is not how it works. There are rules and laws that relate to that, and even they are changing it. You know, they decriminalised in England, and in certain boroughs they decriminalised it and they found out it was a mistake and they went back to the other way. So we wrestle backwards and forwards because of the degree of criminal element —
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: —and things that are i nvolved in this. You want to hear what I have to say. [Laughter] Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: So that is a struggle that we have when we talk about where we are when we get into that debate, and I am just responding since the Honourable Member raised this —the Honourable Member, Mr. Brown. And that is a type of struggle. But here is the issue as it relates to this particular thing here. As long as we have laws in place we must, whether we are liberal like myself or whether we enjoy going to Amsterdam and partaking in places where certain things are legal —and I am all for that if that is what you want to do, knock yourself out —but we have to adhere to the laws that we have in place as long as they are in place. And that is where I have arrived at. And the fact . . . we may think that certain House of Assembly
things are archaic and we have issues with certain things and we feel liberal about them. As Honourable Members of this place, until we choose to come here and change those laws, then we better not think that we can hold ourselves above them because we are somebody special here. And we really have to be . . . and nobody is perfect, I appreciate that, but we need to focus in this place, Mr. Speaker, on what the law is and how it should be applied. As it stands right now illicit drugs —and when I say “illicit” I mean the unlawful use of drugs —is on the books and it is illegal. And if we want to, as we have done, as has been advocated by Members on the other side, hold ourselves up to good governance, then I do not agree with the concept of you have a law in the workplace that says you cannot be high be-cause you are operating heavy machinery and all the rest of it. We are operating some pretty heavy m achinery up here—some heavy intellectual machinery. And whilst I think it is totally dangerous for your forklift operator down at the airport or on the docks to be high, that he cannot be doing that, so we have a law to prevent that and to ensure that there are strict pol icies in place in the workplace. Should we really be coming to this place high? I certainly know sometimes I . . . you know, I get in here . . . I certainly sometimes think Honourable Members feel like having a dr ink.
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongMr. Speaker, will the Member yield to a point of clarification?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWhat are you going to clarify there?
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongWell, Mr. Speaker, only that— Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: He is going to clarify he is not high.
Mr. Rolfe Commissiong—only that a Member who has been drinking alcohol under that logic —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo, that is not really a point of order.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, please, please. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: Well, but to that point as well, the logic is that unfortunately alcohol —and I am not advocating that, I do not think anybody should come here if they are tipsy either, of course not. But the point is that they may …
Honourable Member, please, please.
Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: Well, but to that point as well, the logic is that unfortunately alcohol —and I am not advocating that, I do not think anybody should come here if they are tipsy either, of course not. But the point is that they may legally have gone down the road and had a pint and come back. They cannot l egally go down the road and have a joint or smoke some crack and come back up in here. They cannot do that. They cannot do that legally. [Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, you will have a chance to speak. You will have a chance to speak and if the Honourable Member is saying something you do not agree with, you will have a chance to stand up and speak and make your point. So let’s let people have their point …
Honourable Member, you will have a chance to speak. You will have a chance to speak and if the Honourable Member is saying something you do not agree with, you will have a chance to stand up and speak and make your point. So let’s let people have their point and then you will have an opportunity to debate it.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: They cannot do that legally. And we have to be about . . . and it is not a fascist argument, with respect, because as I said, you ar e dealing with one of the most liberal guys that you can when it comes to these things. But the fact of the matter is that we have to, if we are going to hold ourselves to certain standards, they have to be across the board. And we hold ourselves up, we want to have a Good Governance Act (it took too long to come into play), we have Standing Orders, we have all of the rules. And when people . . . hey, if there has been a slight infringement of the rules and anybody looks —with the Government —we are going to hear great fanfare about, You broke the rules! You are breaking the rules! You are supposed to be this and that . . . you are supposed to be beyond r eproach! Well, the rules are the rules, Mr. Speaker, across the board. And as Honourable Members on the other side have said, and I have heard them say it, No one can waive the law . Well, we are not in a position to waive the law. So as I fundamentally think we need to address this issue, particularly when it comes to marij uana— and I really do—I think we need to address it and we need to look at it and we need to have a good conversation on it. And I advocate it should be decri minalised. Even legalised in certain respects, perhaps with regard to cultivation —that is my personal view, my personal view. Medicinal marijuana, I think should be legalised. And I think that is the debate that we need to have and it is an important one. But for what the position is —
[Inaudible interjection] [Gavel]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIt is four o’clock in the morning, and so let us let one person speak. Let us listen. If you want to speak you get up and speak and then we can get out of here. Let us . . . let us . . . you know. Hon. Mark …
It is four o’clock in the morning, and so let us let one person speak. Let us listen. If you want to speak you get up and speak and then we can get out of here. Let us . . . let us . . . you know.
Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: So, Mr. Speaker, you know the point is this. We cannot play fast. I know Members on the other side do not like it. I know they do not like it. I do not particularly like it either. I do not like . . . you House of Assembly 2306 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
know, having morals . . . another rule you have to follow. So if I decide to troop off to Amsterdam and I am standing outside a coffee shop, and have to worry about that smoke wafting over me and coming back here and getting tested, and be in trouble in the House explaining it. Sure, I do not like all that stuff. I do not like too many rules, never have done. But that does not mean I am not one who is an individual that will follow the rules, especially the letter of the law. And I believe wholeheartedly in that, whether I like them or not, I have to follow them. So what is this about? This is not about a name and shame. This is about establishing a Joint Select Committee—
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberYes. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: A Joint Select Committee where the Members, the Members of the Joint Select Committee consider and determine the specific i mplementation and monitoring of the said policy. S o it is not about suddenly, Mr. Speaker, you say, MP Mr. Gibbons, you have got to …
Yes. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: A Joint Select Committee where the Members, the Members of the Joint Select Committee consider and determine the specific i mplementation and monitoring of the said policy. S o it is not about suddenly, Mr. Speaker, you say, MP Mr. Gibbons, you have got to be tested. And you get dragged out the back here and Mr. Fox is standing there with the kit and waiting for you to go into men’s room and come out and be tested and, you know , Dr. Gibbons tested positive and he is named and shamed and that in the public. That to my mind is not what this is about or should be bout. What I think it is about, and what it should be about is requiring a certain degree of accountability and discipline for what we do. Let me ask . . . and say how this would work, too. So we have got a Joint Se-lect Committee that will establish how this will go. And by the way if somebody happens to go off to Amster-dam, comes back and gets randomly tested, you know, it might be in Vermont. I go to Vermont a lot. It is legal there, nobody cares there. If somebody comes back here and they are tested like that, they have to go before the Joint Select Committee who says, You tested positive. And you say, Well, yeah, I was in Amsterdam visiting my family. I had a joint because it is legal there. I have not been smoking up here. And that is the position. And then it will be up to the Joint S elect Committee to say, Okay, we are going to accept that. You are going to come back, Honourable Me mber, in two weeks and be tested again just so we can clarify that position. These are all the types of things that a sens ible Joint Select Committee can consider. But I think the trend, you know, worldwide, people want to have confidence in their legislators, in their law makers. They want to know, actually, they do not want to know, they demand (it might be hypocritical, but they demand) that we follow the law. They might want to go drive around, Mr. Speaker, at 60 kilometres an hour but you know full well if you saw a Member of the House doing it in a car it would be all over the paper. So people want to know that we are following the le tter of the law. So I see this just as another check and ba lance to say, Hey, we are going to be beyond r eproach. We are going to adhere to the laws of the land, and we are going to prepared because we are doing that to be subject to this type of provision with regard to the rules in the House. And I think it is important we just understand what it is about, in the a pplication of the Joint Select Committee, and the way we can apply it, it is a good thing and we should get on and do it.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: It is a Joint Committee about joints.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJoint Select Committee. Hon. Mark J. Pettingill: A Joint Committee. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Yes. That is an ominous name for the Committee. Is there any other Honourable Member who would care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Minister of the Environ ment. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Good morning, good morning, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister Richards, you have the floor. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. This motion that has been put forward I su pport. And years ago I used to race jet skis in Bermuda for fun and it was organised, it was under the Berm uda Powerboat …
Minister Richards, you have the floor. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. This motion that has been put forward I su pport. And years ago I used to race jet skis in Bermuda for fun and it was organised, it was under the Berm uda Powerboat Association, and it was just fun, just grudge racing. We go down to Ferry Reach, put our jet skis in the water, and race around a few pylons. I did it for about two years. And then one day I got a phone call (I was at work) saying that I had to get drug tested. And I said, Okay, what is this for? Well, apparently all of the sports clubs in Bermuda . . . and I cannot remember what organisation it was, Mr. Speaker—
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Okay. So basically they passed a mandate or a law that said if you parti cipate in any sport, any sport in Bermuda you had to go get drug tested. And that was regardless of whether you represented Bermuda overseas. This was just to race on Sundays. And it is well known that if you parHouse of Assembly
ticipate in any sport —whether it be ping -pong or pool or snooker —you have to get drug tested.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Snooker. It is l ate. You have to get drug tested. Any Bermuda sports person who represents Bermuda on the n ational stage, they get drug tested. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Regardless, they get drug tested.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberNo, no.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll drugs, all drugs. Yes. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: All drugs. So here we are passing legislation. We are making a law. We travel abroad. We represent Bermuda on the interna-tional stage — [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: I stopped racing. [Laughter] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: …
All drugs, all drugs. Yes. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: All drugs. So here we are passing legislation. We are making a law. We travel abroad. We represent Bermuda on the interna-tional stage —
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: I stopped racing. [Laughter] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: I am not going to lie. It is on the record —I stopped racing. [Laughter]
Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: I stopped racing. I was still in my rebellious stage. But my point is this —
[Inaudible interjec tion] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: —Mr. Speaker, my point is this: We are legislators. We are setting law. We have to abide by the law of the land whether we like it or not. This is not a moral issue. This is not, Oh, my rights. It is the law of the land. And if we make law we should abide by the law. And that is it. It is not a philosophical thing for me. We make law. We abide by the law. If you object to the law, change the law. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now recognises the Deputy Speaker, Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser. You have the floor.
Mrs. Suzann Roberts -HolshouserI wanted to stand to say a few things. One of the things I found really fascinating. I do not know if Members here are regis-tered on Facebook, but when I was doing some r esearch the other day and of course I came up with some of the stories …
I wanted to stand to say a few things. One of the things I found really fascinating. I do not know if Members here are regis-tered on Facebook, but when I was doing some r esearch the other day and of course I came up with some of the stories about what they have done in the United States and in Georgia, and how Bills were f idaddled and changed when they were thinking they were trying to pass Bills for those going on welfare, [but when] they discovered that they had been changed and all of a sudden law makers were up for the gamut of being random drug tested, they did a quick turnabout. So it was always like, Well, it is better them than me. Or, Look, we are the law. We create the law, so we must be able to look down and say, You must do this but we don’t have to. But there is a Facebook page and it is titled (if anyone wants to do any searches) there is not a lot of activity like the 187 members. But it is called “Manda-tory drug testing for Politicians.” One of the things I noticed that was fascinating, there was just one line on the side, on the top of the header that said, They are employed by us. And I went, You know, that is the point. We as [legislators] do what we feel is best. In fact, in a lot of cases, and I believe in the case of the sport s body, they were driven, their decision was dri ven by the international body, that international sports. If you were going to participate in international sports, the participants were going to be drug tested. And as a result they had to fall in under that remit. But it cannot be a situation where it is good for the goose but not good for the gander. And again, it is about the law. And while I truly, truly understand the concept of alcohol and alcohol being a drug, we have seen what this legal drug can do. What it does to our children, what it does to lives, what it does to families. At the same time, I want to bring it back home here to say that this is the remit that we have before us today, about creating a Joint Select Committee. And that Joint Select Committee would look at the very issues that we are talking about that have the ability to bring in those with the expertise. And we heard from the Honourable Member Brown who mentioned that, and he probably has more knowledge— [Laughter]
Mrs. Suzann Roberts -HolshouserSo I just wanted to say that we have in front of us a suggestion of looking at a Joint Select Committee. And it is that rec ommendation that I would suggest we . . . which will en able us to move forward rather than just not addressing House …
So I just wanted to say that we have in front of us a suggestion of looking at a Joint Select Committee. And it is that rec ommendation that I would suggest we . . . which will en able us to move forward rather than just not addressing House of Assembly 2308 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
the issue which a lot of Bermuda would like to see addressed. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. Would any other Honourable Member care to speak? Then I will ask the Minister if he will respond and then make the motion. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, I think we have seen overwhelming support in this House. Due to the early morning hours, I …
Thank you, Honourable Member. Would any other Honourable Member care to speak? Then I will ask the Minister if he will respond and then make the motion. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, I think we have seen overwhelming support in this House. Due to the early morning hours, I am sure some Me mbers were not inclined to speak up, but I appreciate the comments. And I just think to reiterate the point that my colleagues have made that this is a Committee that is going to be governed by Members of the Upper and Lower House to implement and have the policy implemented and monitored as we go forward. So it us who are going to decide it and it is us who are g oing to police it and I think that is an appropriate way to do it. And I appreciate colleagues’ support on this and attention going forward. Mr. Speaker, having said that and with the long day that we have had here I would ask that this House approve this motion.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. So the motion has been put and the motion is (and I will read the motion): “In an effort to ensure that Bermuda’s Legisl ature meets the highest standards of governance for democratic legislatures and in order to lead by exam-ple; be it resolved that this Honourable House …
All right. So the motion has been put and the motion is (and I will read the motion): “In an effort to ensure that Bermuda’s Legisl ature meets the highest standards of governance for democratic legislatures and in order to lead by exam-ple; be it resolved that this Honourable House a pproves and adopts a mandatory random drug testing policy for Members of the Legislature and that a Joint Select Committee be appointed to consider and determine the specifics, implementation and monitoring of the said Policy.” All those in favour, say Aye. Those against, say Nay.
AYES.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Ayes have it. It has been approved. [The Motion to adopt a mandatory drug testing policy for Members of the Legislature and to appoint a Joint Select Committee to consider and determine the sp ecifics, implementation and monitoring of the said Pol icy was passed.]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI now recognise . . . that completes our . . . Order [No.] 10 is carried over Dr. Gibbons; correct? [Inaudible interjection]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, I appreciate that. Order [No.] 11 is also carried over. So I will go first to Minister Crockwell. SUSPENSION OF STANDING O RDER 21 Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I move that Standing Order 21 be suspended to enable me to move that the Bill entitled …
Thank you, I appreciate that. Order [No.] 11 is also carried over. So I will go first to Minister Crockwell.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING O RDER 21 Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I move that Standing Order 21 be suspended to enable me to move that the Bill entitled the Bermuda Tourism Au-thority Act 2013 be now read the third time by its title only.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAre there any objections? Carry on, Minister. [Motion carried: Standing Order 21 suspended.] THIRD READING BERMUDA TOURISM AUTHORITY ACT 2013 Hon. Shawn G. Crockwell: Mr. Speaker, I move that the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013 now do pass.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Are there any objections to that? The Bill, the Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013 is passed. [Motion carried: The Bermuda Tourism Authority Act 2013 was read a third time and passed.]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Chair now recognises Minister, Dr. Grant Gibbons. SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21 Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move that Standing Order 21 be suspended to enable me to move that the Bill entitled the Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013 be now read …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAre there any objections? Dr. Gibbons, carry on, please. [Motion carried: Standing Order 21 suspended.] THIRD READING INCENTIVES FOR JOB MAKERS ACT 2013 Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: I move that the Bill do now pass.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, the Bill is passed. House of Assembly All those in favour, say Aye. Those against, Nay? AYES and one audible Nay.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Ayes have it. [Laughter] [Motion carried: The Incentives for Job Makers Act 2013 was read a third time and passed.]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Bermuda Immigration and Protection Act . . . Minister of Public Safety, Minister Dunkley. SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21 Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I move that Standing Order 21 be suspended to enable me to move that Bill entitled the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment …
The Bermuda Immigration and Protection Act . . . Minister of Public Safety, Minister Dunkley.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21 Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I move that Standing Order 21 be suspended to enable me to move that Bill entitled the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013 be now read the third time by its title only.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Are there any objections? Carry on, Minister. [Motion carried: Standing Order 21 suspended.] THIRD READING BERMUDA IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION AMENDMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2013 Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013. I move that the Bill do now pass. …
Thank you. Are there any objections? Carry on, Minister. [Motion carried: Standing Order 21 suspended.]
THIRD READING
BERMUDA IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION AMENDMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2013 Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013. I move that the Bill do now pass.
The Sp eaker: Thank you, Minister. Are there any objections to that? There are no objections. The Bermuda Imm igration and Protection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013 is passed. [Motion carried: The Bermuda Immigration and Pr otection Amendment (No. 2) Act 2013, read a third time and passed.]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI now recognise the Minister of F inance, Minister Bob Richards. You have the floor. SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move that Standing Order 21 be suspended to enable me to move that the Bill ent itled the …
I now recognise the Minister of F inance, Minister Bob Richards. You have the floor.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move that Standing Order 21 be suspended to enable me to move that the Bill ent itled the Insurance Amendment Act 2013 be now read a third time by its title only.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAre there any objections? There are none. Minister, carry on. [Motion carried: Standing Order 21 suspended. ] THIRD READING INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT 2013 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, I move that the Bill do now pass.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Minister. Are there any objections to that? There are none. The Bill the Insurance Amendment Act 2013 is passed. [Motion carried: The Insurance Amendment Act 2013 was read a third time and passed.]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMr. Premier? ADJOURNMENT Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move that we adjourn until October 2, Wednesday, at 10:00 am.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. The Chair recognises the Member Zane De Silva. You have the floor. HOSPITAL CONSTRUCTION SITE
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaThank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, actually I will tell you where I would like to start tonight, or this morning, or this af-ternoon, Mr. Speaker, is . . . we just finished talking about drugs and forming a Joint Select Committee to deal with and discuss and make plans …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, actually I will tell you where I would like to start tonight, or this morning, or this af-ternoon, Mr. Speaker, is . . . we just finished talking about drugs and forming a Joint Select Committee to deal with and discuss and make plans for good go vernance with regard to drugs. Mr. Speaker, I was off the Island last week as you know, and upon arriving back on the Island, to my dismay, I received several calls, one to do with drugs. The drugs, Mr. Speaker, the concern about drugs happened to be at the hospital site. Mr. Speaker, the information has been given to me— The Spe aker: When you say “drugs,” explain yourself.
House of Assembly 2310 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Okay, now I understand what you are talking about.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaSo Mr. Speaker, I bring that up because the concern is quite large as to what is happening there. And I say, I bring that up because it was brought to my attention, but I ask that the Minister of Health and Seniors certainly look into this and r eport …
So Mr. Speaker, I bring that up because the concern is quite large as to what is happening there. And I say, I bring that up because it was brought to my attention, but I ask that the Minister of Health and Seniors certainly look into this and r eport back to this House. Because you will know that we have been here for 10 months now under an OBA Government and I do not think we have had an up-date on the new hospital as of yet. Mr. Speaker, you will know that when I was Minister I brought reports here quite often and gave updates as to the progress at the hospital, and I would strongly suggest that the Minister do the same. It is Bermuda’s largest construction project ever and I think that the people of Bermuda certainly deserve to receive updates on a regular basis.
ROYAL GAZETTE ARTICLE: “MP’S COMMENTS NOT EXACTLY HONOURABLE
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaMr. Speaker, another shock to me (as I am sure it was to you) [occurred when] I opened up the paper on Wednesday —that is the Royal Gazette paper —and I saw a headline “MP’s comments not exactly honour able.” And Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Minister, Mr. Sylvan Richards, appa …
Mr. Speaker, another shock to me (as I am sure it was to you) [occurred when] I opened up the paper on Wednesday —that is the Royal Gazette paper —and I saw a headline “MP’s comments not exactly honour able.” And Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Minister, Mr. Sylvan Richards, appa rently made some comments in the House last week that really offended two of the workers down at the St. George’s property, on the golf course down there. In fact, a letter was written by one of those gentlemen, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Jeremy Smith and I was . . . I was shocked to hear. Now, I know R oyal Gazette does not get it right a lot, I know that. So I figured I would bring it to this House and ask the Honourable Minister Richards if in fact what was wri tten is true. Did the Honourable Minister say that these two gentlemen were doing a poor job? That is what it says right here in the paper. A Minister of this Gov-ernment crying down two workers. And as he outlined in his letter, [he spoke of] how hard they worked, some of the challenges they have. Mr. Speaker, I think that that Minister would certainly want to apol ogise to these two workers. Not only did that shock me, Mr. Speaker, but the fact that they were called to a meeting and they were asked to sign a new contract, which was almost 50 per cent less than what they made before. And they said if you do not like that you can hit the road. This is the same Government that constantly . . . I have heard for 10 months and prior to the election, Jobs, jobs —let’s put jobs on the table. Now if that were not enough, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Kenny Bascome who is the representative for St. George’s —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Honourable Member. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Zane J. S. De Silva—the Honourable Member, very Honourable Member, indeed, Kenneth Bascome. Mr. Speaker, he spoke to former workers down at the St. George’s club and he told them they were doing a good job. So I thank him for that. Cer-tainly he is an area MP and he had his eye on …
—the Honourable Member, very Honourable Member, indeed, Kenneth Bascome. Mr. Speaker, he spoke to former workers down at the St. George’s club and he told them they were doing a good job. So I thank him for that. Cer-tainly he is an area MP and he had his eye on the ball. So thank Kenny for giving him, giving the guys their due. They felt a little better. But what was more shocking to me, Mr. Speaker, was that when I read that these gentlemen reached out to the Premier —
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Zane J. S. De Silvayes, they reached out to the Premier. “I made contact by e- mail with Premier Craig Cannonier, who also felt something was amiss and promised to look into it, and possibly put them in touch with the Minister Sylvan Richards.” [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Zane J. S. De S ilvaI said that from the begi nning. I am reading from the Gazette a letter to the ed itor . . . signed— [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Zane J. S. De Silva—signed by Jeremy Smith. House of Assembly So Mr. Speaker, I ask . . . and one of the things he finishes off in his letter is that “To this day (4 months later), I have yet to receive a response.” Now this is a Government and a Premier that …
—signed by Jeremy Smith. House of Assembly
So Mr. Speaker, I ask . . . and one of the things he finishes off in his letter is that “To this day (4 months later), I have yet to receive a response.” Now this is a Government and a Premier that constantly talks about creating jobs and looking out for the peo-ple of Bermuda. Mr. Speaker, I would like some explanation to this letter, which I will keep with me here for some time. And I think the Honourable Minister, Mr. Ric hards, needs to reach out to these two gentlemen, give them a humble apology for making a statement like that in this House. And, Mr. Moniz, the Honourable Member, is making fun of that. I do not think it is a funny matter, Mr. Speaker. I do not think it is a funny matter. Now Mr. Speaker, let me finish on this note. I received a call last night from a very concerned— [Inaudible interjection]
HOSPITAL EMPLOYEES GIVEN ULTIMATUM
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaOh, yes, that is right. —a very concerned individual, Mr. Speaker, very concerned. Mr. Speaker, employees at the hospital are being given ultimatums. Now, listen to this one. Now this is from a Government that talks about jobs, jobs, transparency, looking after the people. I got a very distressed call …
Oh, yes, that is right. —a very concerned individual, Mr. Speaker, very concerned. Mr. Speaker, employees at the hospital are being given ultimatums. Now, listen to this one. Now this is from a Government that talks about jobs, jobs, transparency, looking after the people. I got a very distressed call last night. The person has been given an ultimatum —you take this redundancy package or you take almost a 20 per cent —that is right —20 per cent cut in pay. This person is not 65, they are not 55, they are not 45. Mr. Speaker, several people at the hospital have been given this ultimatum.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaI will leave it to the Minister to do her work and report back to this House. B ecause you all were laughing. you all are laughing, but I got a call from a very stressed person, crying, wonder-ing about what they are going to do. given an ultim atum—you …
I will leave it to the Minister to do her work and report back to this House. B ecause you all were laughing. you all are laughing, but I got a call from a very stressed person, crying, wonder-ing about what they are going to do. given an ultim atum—you take this redundancy package or you take an almost 20 per cent drop in pay —outrageous! Outrageous, Mr. Speaker. So all I am saying to you is if this is the new mantra . . . is this the new mantra of a Government that says they are going to create jobs? We spent all day today . . . all day today, Mr. Speaker, in this House talking about jobs, the Tourism Authority, how we are going to protect jobs. The Premier gave a very passionate speech about looking after our people and creating jobs and getting our people back to work. But I received this news on my return, Mr. Speaker? I would lik e the OBA Government to respond to that in good time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now recognises the Honourable Minister for Public Health and Seniors, Minister Patr icia Gordon- Pamplin. You have the floor. HOSPITAL CONSTRUCTION SITE Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in response to the comments made by the Shadow Minister let …
Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair now recognises the Honourable Minister for Public Health and Seniors, Minister Patr icia Gordon- Pamplin. You have the floor.
HOSPITAL CONSTRUCTION SITE
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in response to the comments made by the Shadow Minister let me first of all say I am appreciative of him highlighting some of those things that have been brought to his attention. With respect to the use of illicit drugs on the hospital construction site, the police were actually on that site, did a raid, did a check based on information that they have been told about. But this is certainly an issue that is for the Police Department to deal with. I do not believe that it is something that the Minister of Health should deal with. It is something that the Mini ster of . . . and . . . you know . . . but anyway I am appreciative of this issue. I was made aware of it, not directly, I was made aware of it indirectly. I was made aware of it indirectly, but it is a matter for the police and not a matter for the Minister of Health. With respect to the updates on the construction project, I am happy to bring updates . The Minister says it has been 10 months and he has heard nothing. Well, the Budget was in March and I think I stood here for about four hours reading the Budget brief on every aspect . . . every aspect of the hospital. And so that was six months ago. And I am quite happy to bring additional updates. There have been challenges and I will be willing to give that statement as soon as it is practicable. I do not have a problem with that. And thank you, Minister, for continuing to show interest therein.
HOSPI TAL EMPLOYEES GIVEN ULTIMATUM
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Now, I will not speak to the other issue with respect to the golf courses, but I will speak to the issue with respect to the Minister’s last concern respecting employees at the hospital being given ultimatums. Let me say that the Shadow Minister will know, as I do, that the hospital is run by the Bermuda Hospitals Board albeit the Board is appointed by the Minister. I do get monthly updates in terms of things that are happening at the hospital, but at no time has this particular matter been brought to my attention by the Board. You can be assured that this Government has a tremendous sensitivity towards our workers, and I will make a telephone call tomorrow so I will have the opportunity to speak with the Chairman of the Board so I can get, today, I will not leave it until tomorrow. I will call him today, later on Saturday, so that I can get House of Assembly 2312 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report
an update with respect to the particular matter of which the Minister spoke. But let me for clarity . . . and as a way of an open invitation to any member of staff, if they find that they are having challenges and they do not know what to do, do not wait until the Minister comes home from a two -week holiday, do not wait . . . do not wait until the Shadow Minister comes home from a two- week holiday, they can call me at any time—day or night —I do not have an issue.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaPoint of order. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: Or you may not have been on holiday.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister, there cannot be a point of order on that, she said they — Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I may have said —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPlease sit down. Honourable Member, please, sit down.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaMr. Speaker, she said I took a two -week vacation and I did not. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: —I may have—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPlease, sit down. Please sit down. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I apologise—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, please, sit down!
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaOkay. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I do apologise. I just made the assumption that the Minister was on vacation and that was the wrong thing to do. I do apologise. I withdraw the comment. The Minister was not in the House for two weeks for whatever his purposes were, …
Okay. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I do apologise. I just made the assumption that the Minister was on vacation and that was the wrong thing to do. I do apologise. I withdraw the comment. The Minister was not in the House for two weeks for whatever his purposes were, and these things happen. There are times that we have to be out of the House of Asse mbly and I do apologise if I misrepresented it. But let me say that I am open at all times to speak with people with any challenges relating to the Health Ministry. I get phone calls all day, all night, any day irrespective of the fact that the former Minister would say that I am a part -time Minister.
Mr. Zane J. S. De SilvaYou are part time. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: Clients of our Mi nistry are no respecters of time and the clock and I welcome concerns that are expressed because it gives me the opportunity to know where their con-cerns are, and I will understand. I go out and visit …
You are part time. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: Clients of our Mi nistry are no respecters of time and the clock and I welcome concerns that are expressed because it gives me the opportunity to know where their con-cerns are, and I will understand. I go out and visit people all the time. I am at the hospital all the time. I am at the hospital all the time.
[Inaudible interjections]
Hon. Patricia J. Gor don-Pamplin: I have been up to Hermitage Road. Yes, I have been to Hermitage Road —
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: Well, that is not my problem. That is not my problem that they were not there when I have been there.
The Speake r: Honourable Member, if you would speak to the Chair you might better get through your . . . finish your conversation.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes. Thanks, Mr. Speaker. You know, there are some things that you just should never dignify with a response. And when Ho nourable Members come with those types of ridiculous comments, those are the things which you just do not dignify with a response. So I am not going to allow him to take me down that road. But what I will say is that as the Minister of Health there is a plethora of areas that require attention. I give that attention to the best of my ability every possible chance. So if the Minister believes that there is something deficient, I am quite happy to accept cri ticism. I do not have a problem with criticism because I know that I can deal with only the matters with which I can deal at any given point in time. And whether I am dealing with . . . you know . . . problems with grease balls on the South Shore (which is an environmental health issue), whether I am dealing with Jump 2b Fit and Wellness Bermuda, down at Victoria Park, or whether I am dealing with many other issues that exist in every aspect of the Ministry, whether I am dealing with challenges in the hospital in terms of the good treatm ent or lack thereof that exists in the hospital — there are many areas. So if I cannot have the oppor-tunity to speak with the 1,800- odd people who are included in the Health Ministry and the various parts of the Health Ministry then I, all I can say is, I leave m yself open to their phone calls. H ouse of Assembly
But I do honestly appreciate the Shadow Minister bringing issues to my attention. And know that I will have those issues dealt with. If appropriate, I will make Ministerial Statements and bring them to this House. If i t is not appropriate, I will deal with the i ssues or make sure that they are dealt with. But I can say finally, Mr. Speaker, that there are so many challenges and problems, there are so many legacy issues that I have to deal with, that I think that the Honourable Shadow Minister should perhaps try once and a while to be perhaps a little bit more humble and not just to stand and criticise, but to recognise that many of the challenges with which I have to deal are ones of his making under his administration. And you can be absolutely sure that we will do our very best to continue to clean up the mess and the shambles that we were left with. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
[Laughter and crosstalk]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe House is adjourned to Wednesday, October 2 at 10:00 a m. [Gavel]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerDrive home safely. Honourable Members, slow down. Slow down. Slow down, Honourable Members. [Gavel] [At 4:59 am [Saturday, September 28, 2013] the House stood adjourned until 10:00 am, Wednesday, 2 October 2013.] House of Assembly 2314 27 September 2013 Official Hansard Report House of Assembly