The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Minutes of the 3 rd of February will be deferred. MESSAGES FROM THE GOVERNOR
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere are none. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE SPEAKER OR MEMBER PRESIDING
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere is no announcement, but the Chair will recognise the Member from constituency number 7. Minister Richards, you have the floor. FORMAL APOLOGY TO HOUSE Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, for my 1comment last week I apologise to you, this Honourable House, and the …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member. MESSAGES FROM THE SENATE
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere are none. PAPERS AND OTHER COMMUNI CATIONS TO THE HOUSE
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Chair will recognise the Minister, Minister Patricia Gordon- Pamplin. You have the floor. 1Official Hansard Report, 3 February 2017, page 441 Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Good morning, and good morning, co lleagues.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGood morning. NATIONAL TRAINING B OARD ANNUAL REPORT 2014 TO 2016 Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to attach for the information of the Honourable House of Assembly the National Training Board Annual Report 2014 to 2016. The Spe aker: Thank you, Minister. The Chair …
Good morning.
NATIONAL TRAINING B OARD ANNUAL REPORT 2014 TO 2016 Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to attach for the information of the Honourable House of Assembly the National Training Board Annual Report 2014 to 2016.
The Spe aker: Thank you, Minister. The Chair will now recognise the Minister, Minister Sylvan Richards. You have the floor.
BERMUDA SPORT ANTI -DOPING AUTHORITY 2014 ANNUAL REPORT (YEAR ENDING 31ST MARCH 2015)
BERMUDA SPORT ANTI -DOPING AUTHORITY 2015 ANNUAL REPORT (YEAR ENDING 31ST MARCH 2016)
BERMUDA SPORT ANTI -DOPING AUTHORITY AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT ( YEAR ENDING 31ST MARCH 2013 )
Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have the honour to attach for the information of the Honourable House of Assembly the following reports: • Bermuda Sport Anti -Doping Authority [BS ADA] 2014 Annual Report (for the Year Ending 31 st March 2015) • Bermuda Sport Anti -Doping Authority 2015 Annual Report (for the Year Ending 31st March 2016) • Bermuda Sport Anti -Doping Authority Audited Financial Statement (for the Year Ending 31st March 2013)
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you, Minister. PETITIONS
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere are none. 464 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS ANDJUNIOR MINISTERS
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Chair will recognise first the Ho nourable Premier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Good morning, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGood morning. BREXIT UPDATE: REPORT ON JOINT MINISTER IAL COUNCIL —EXIT NEGOTIATIONS Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: And good morning, colleagues. Mr. Speaker, Members of this House will be aware I attended the Joint Ministerial Council on E uropean Negotiat ions (or shortened to JMC EN ) in London earlier this …
Good morning.
BREXIT UPDATE: REPORT ON JOINT MINISTER IAL COUNCIL —EXIT NEGOTIATIONS Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: And good morning, colleagues. Mr. Speaker, Members of this House will be aware I attended the Joint Ministerial Council on E uropean Negotiat ions (or shortened to JMC EN ) in London earlier this week , and I was accompanied by the Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance, the Hon. E.T (Bob) Richards , JP, MP; Cabinet Secretary, Dr . Derrick Binns ; and our UK Representative, Ms. Kimberley Durrant. I believe the discussions this week were productive, as this is the start of a process of dialogue with UK Ministers in preparation for the UK’s negotiations with the European Union. I had the pleasure of meeting the Prime Mini ster, the Rt. Hon. Theresa May , MP, on the grounds of Number 10 [Downing Street]. The Prime Mini ster makes it clear that Britain’s ambition is to negotiate the best possible deal for the UK while continuing to operate within the European Market. The Prime Minister outlined 12 objectives for the forthcoming negotiatio ns. Some of those speak directly to the UK Government’s domestic agenda of building a stronger and fairer society by embracing economic and social reforms. A new partnership with the EU would see the UK withdraw from membership of both the Single Market and the EU’s Customs U nion, and seek a f ree trade agreement with the EU to provide access to the Single Market and tariff -free cross- border trade. The UK would no longer contri bute huge sums to the EU budget, but may participate in, and contribute to, some specific EU programmes. Our obligation as leaders and r epresentatives of the Overseas Territories [OTs] is to ensure we explore all relevant opportunities and uphold our ec onomic stability throughout the negotiation process once Article 50 is tr iggered. We expect the Prime Mi nister to trigger Article 50 of the Treaty on the Function-ing of the European Union by the end of March 2017. Mr. Speaker, t he Joint Ministerial Council on European Negotiations is the formal consultation f orum for Overseas Territories provided under the White Paper for the United Kingdom’s Exit from and New Partnership with the European Union. The purpose of the JMC EN is to ensure that the territories’ position, including from a UK perspective, is adopted through the negotiation process. Meetings are chaired by Par-liamentary Unders ecretary of State for Exiting the E uropean Union, Robin Walker , MP, and Foreign Office Minister for Overseas Territories, the Rt . Hon. Baroness Anelay. We agreed with the UK Government that when the UK leaves the European Union, the strong relationship we have with the EU and the important mutual trade and business links we share should con-tinue. The [UK] Government is committed to engaging with the Overseas Territories as we prepare to exit the E U and to ensuring that a deal that works for ev eryone is achieved. In this context, Mr. Speaker, fellow leaders and I emphasi sed that the UK Territories can contribute to a truly global Britain. The Overseas Terr itories derive considerable benefits from their a ssoci ation with the EU. These include funding, trade priv ileges, free movement of people, and political access and profile. A major concern is that a UK exit from the EU would remove all of these benefits. For some t erritories , the European Development Fund (or EDF) support represents 60 per cent of their overall budget. With the UK exit from the EU, these territories will certainly face challenges in retai ning access to future EDF allocations. Minister of State for the Department for International Development [DFID], the Rt . Hon. Lord Bates , indicated that the UK allocates 4.78 billion E uros to the overall EDF contribution for EU develo pment assistance. Once the UK leaves the European Union , their overall commitment to the EDF will be subject to discussion as to how it is spent on intern ational development aid. Territory leaders have asked that the UK uphold its position that OT ’s can be the first call on this aid. In the view of the territories, it is an important and a moral obligation to push the UK Government to provide a firm commitment on the r etention of these benefits those territori es currently derive from their association with the EU. Mr. Speaker, perhaps the greatest concern for most Bermudians is f ree movement of our people within the EU , a matter we discussed with the Home Office’s Director for EU Exit Immigration Policy. The home office is leading on three areas of priority within these negotiations: 1. protecting the rights of EU citizens already r esiding in the UK ; 2. looking at the future flow of EU citizens into the UK ( what an overall UK immigration framework should look like in the future); and 3. the rights of UK citizens to go in to the EU in the future. Mr. Speaker, the main EU Treaty provision relevant to the free movement of people will no longer apply. Nevertheless, my fellow colleagues and I were strong and united in our advocacy for the retention of the free movement of British Overseas Territory Cit izens [BOTC] throughout the EU after the UK exit. This
Bermuda House of Assembly issue becomes all the more critical for those territories that share a border with a European t erritory or r equire access through such a t erritory for any mov ement in or out of their own t erritory. Mr. Speaker, w e discussed trade issues with Lord Price, CVO, Minister of State for the D epartment for International Trade [DIT]. The International Trade Department’s focus includes the World Trade Organization [WTO], through which the UK will seek to s ecure access rights to other members’ markets. Moving forward, Mr. Speaker, we have to r emember that life goes on after Britain departs from the European Union. It is in no one’s interest to have u ncertainty on the future, particularly on the economic stability of Britain and its devolved administrations , including Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies. The position of the Foreign Office and the D epartment for Exiting the European Union is as follows: “The Overseas Territories are integral to the UK Government’s ambitions to create a more outward looking United Kingdom. We are committed to taking their priorities into account as we prepare for negotiations to exit the EU. ” Mr. Speaker, this Government will ensure that the UK Government upholds its commitment regar ding exiting the EU , and we are curr ently working with UK officials to establish a framework for immediate responses where matters arise relating to Bermuda under the negotiations. Mr. Speaker, in closing, the next JMC Eur opean Negotiations are scheduled to be held in June after the triggering of Article 50. Thank you, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, thank you, Premier. ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER House Visitors
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust before we move on to the next Ministerial Statement, I have to take the time to recognise the Members from the Senate who are here with us: the President of the Senate, Mrs. Carol Bas-sett; the Vice -President of the Senate, Mrs. Joan Di llas-Wright; and the Independent Member, …
Just before we move on to the next Ministerial Statement, I have to take the time to recognise the Members from the Senate who are here with us: the President of the Senate, Mrs. Carol Bas-sett; the Vice -President of the Senate, Mrs. Joan Di llas-Wright; and the Independent Member, Senator Jardine. The Chair will recognise the Premier again.
STATEMENTS BY MINIS TERS ANDJUNIOR MINISTERS
2016 CENSUS OF POPULATION AND HOUSING
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have a Ministerial Statement on the 2016 Census of Population and Housing. I rise to inform the Members of this Honour able House and the people of Bermuda on the progress of the 2016 Population and Housing Census data collection to date. Mr. Speaker, data collection started on the 21st of May 2016 and was scheduled to conclude on the 31st of December 2016. However, due to i ncomplete coverage, the data collection period was extended until the 31st of March 2017. Mr. Speaker, there are two key reasons why achie ving a 100 per cent completion rate is proving to be a challenge. Firstly, despite several recruitment drives, the Department of Statistics has not been able to obtain a sufficient number of active interviewers. Secondly, some members of the public have either outright refused to participate, evaded interviewers visiting their homes , or not contacted the Department of Statistics to complete their questionnaire. Mr. Speaker, as of the 8 th of February 2017, 90 per cent of assessment numbers have been account ed for, which includes a combination of residential, vacant, derelict , and commercial assessment numbers. I am also positioned to report the progress geographically. Hamilton Parish has the highest rate of completion at 93 per cent, and Sandys P arish has the lowest rate of completion at 86 per cent. At the Census District level, Mr. Speaker, there are 10 Cen-sus Districts with a 100 per cent completion rate, and the Census District with the lowest completion rate is in Pembroke Parish. Mr. Speaker, the 2016 Census will finish wit hin budget, and, as a reminder, the benefit of a census is that it provides a snapshot of the size and profile of the population and housing stock at a given point in time. Census data are used to devise effective strat egies relating to infrastructure, education, health, em-ployment, and other economic and social issues. Mr. Speaker, the Census is a national undertaking and requires the support of all residents in or-der to achieve the goal of a 100 per cent completion rate. The Department of Statistics has taken a number of steps recently in an attempt to increase the number of households responding, such as , reminding the public via cell phone texts, letters, radio talk shows, and website advertising. Teams of Census I ntervie wers are also visiting low -responding districts. In this regard, I take the opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to empha-sise to households that have not yet completed their questionnaire that now is the time to be counted. The interview should only take approximately 15 minutes for a household of up to four persons. Mr. Speaker, the Department of Statistics is in the final phase of census data collection, and I ask that all outstanding households take immediate action to be counted in any of the following ways: • call the number on the Request for an Interview card, if this has been left at your res idence, to arrange an interview with the interviewer; 466 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly • call the Department of Statistics on 297- 7761 for a phone interview; • email statistics@gov.bm to make an appointment for a phone interview; and finally, • visit the department on the third floor of the Cedar Parkade Building, 48 Cedar Avenue , Hamilton , between 9:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. , Monday to Friday, excluding public holidays.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to extend my appreciation to the Director of the Department of Statistics, Mrs. Melinda Williams, and her team of statisticians and support staff for their continued commi tment to data collection. I would also like to encourage our census interviewers who are going door to door. This is critical, important work because many far - reaching decisions this country will make will be based on the information that we are n ow collecting. Finally, I would like to extend my gratitude to all the households who have completed their ques-tionnaire. To those 10 per cent who have not been counted, we ask for your support of this initiative of national importance, Mr. Speaker, because people count . Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Premier. The Chair will now recognise the Minister for Economic Development. Dr. Grant Gibbons, you have the floor. UNIVERSAL BROADBAND SERVICE PROVISION
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsThank you, Mr. Speaker, and good morning. Mr. Speaker, as the Minister responsible for telecommunications, I may, from time to time, request that the R egulatory Authority assist me in formulating and implementing policies and regulations for the eff icient and effective delivery of telecommunications services including univers al broadband …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and good morning. Mr. Speaker, as the Minister responsible for telecommunications, I may, from time to time, request that the R egulatory Authority assist me in formulating and implementing policies and regulations for the eff icient and effective delivery of telecommunications services including univers al broadband service and funding, pursuant to Part 6 of the Electronic Comm unications Act of 2011. Mr. Speaker, universal broadband service, also known as universal service obligation , refers to government efforts to ensure that all citizens have access t o a basic level of Internet service at an affordable rate. Mr. Speaker, as Minister, I may make general policies and, as necessary, regulations con-cerning the provision of universal service by one or more providers of public electronic communications, per section 32 of the Electronic Communications Act, including, firstly, “ [32(1) . . . (a) ] the types of services that shall be subject to mandatory universal provision; [(b)] whether any particular type or group of users should be eligible for certain universal services purs uant to social tariffs; and [(c) ] the sources of any special funding for the provision of these services, if r equired, and the basic framework of any funding scheme that may be deemed necessary, in accor d-ance with section 34” of the Electronic Communic ations Act. Mr. Speaker, I have today, as Minister, issued a request to the Regulatory Authority to provide assi stance with formulating and potentially implementing a universal broadband service obligation, with a specific level of broadband download speed that applies to specific types of customers, in accordance with section 33 of the Act. Mr. Speaker, typical best practice for a government and/or a regulator’s assessment of potential universal service obligations relating to broadband shoul d include a specific target download speed as the focus for analysis and consultation. In this context, I have recommended that , first, a 50-megabyte per second broadband download speed be the target for consultation, with such a universal broadband speed obligation potentially mandated on BTC [Bermuda Telephone Company] and One Communications, including Logic and CableVision, which are the ICOL [Integrated Communications Operating License] holders. Second, that the consultation should also assess whether a potential broadband service obligation should apply to the service provider to all residents, businesses , and government -owned entities, including schools and government offices within Bermuda, and to 100 per cent of the geographic coverage of Berm uda. Mr. Speaker, the Authority should, in carrying out its functions, pursue its analysis and consultation with service providers in respect to the recommendations noted above. Mr. Speaker, I have requested also that the Authority, following public consultation, prepare a report that assesses whether the establishment of a funding scheme contributed to by relevant oper ators to support or promote the provision of universal service is necessary and proportionate as per section 34 of the Electronic Communications Ac t. Mr. Speaker, one might ask the question, How would the public benefit from a universal broadband service provision? Mr. Speaker, faster and more wi dely available broadband is considered an important op-portunity to improve education, communication, and public participation in a country’s affairs. One of our main goals to provide universal broadband service is to narrow the so- called digital divide in our Island between those who have access to the Internet and those who do not. Typically, seniors, people on low incomes, the unemployed, tend to have lower rates of broadband use at home. Mr. Speaker, Finland was the first country in the world to establish a universal broadband service as a general right of citizens in 2009. Also in 2009, the United Kingdom announced a universal service commitment of 2 megabytes per second in 2012 for every home in Britain. In 2016, Canada announced a uni-versal service obligation of 50 megabytes per second by 2021.
Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Speaker, the Regulatory Authority is ready to commence the public consultation on a universal broadband service provision for Bermuda and to pr oduce a report on the necessity of a funding scheme to support that obligation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Patricia Gordon- Pamplin, as the acting Minister of E ducation. You have the floor. EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION INQUIRY MODELS Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, during the past year, technical officers in the Department of …
Thank you, Minister. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Patricia Gordon- Pamplin, as the acting Minister of E ducation. You have the floor.
EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION INQUIRY MODELS
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, during the past year, technical officers in the Department of Education have been working with teachers, parents , and the community to inform, establish, and implement an inquiry framework for teaching and learning in preschool and lower pr imary school levels. This morning I take the opportuni-ty, on behalf of the substantive Minister, to share with Honourable Members of this House the concept of an Early Childhood Education Inquiry Model , what steps have been taken to introduce and implement this framework , and the anticipated effects for our children and their learning. Mr. Speaker, my honourable colleagues may recall that in 2013 this Government called for the modernisati on and transformation of early childhood education in Bermuda through the “ Inclusive and Special Education” discussion paper. Key questions to consider when we think about modernisation and transformation of early childhood education are, What is our image of Bermuda’s child? A nd, How will our practices and behaviours towards children reflect these values? The Early Childhood Inquiring Minds fram ework is geared for preschool through Primary 3 st udents and promotes an image of a child who is capable, curious, and engaged in learning from birth. Mr. Speaker, the I nquiring Minds framework recognises that young children are learning every day. Like scien-tists, children are researching their world. They ask big and important questions , such as , Why do dogs wag their tails? Do they have feelings like us? Is a slug a snail without a shell? How do trees drink? Do they have a tongue? A nd, what is two tens? Mr. Speaker, the Inquiring Mind’s Framework, or Inquiry Model, builds on the natural curiosity and questions of young children. The model has four phases: (1) notice; (2) wonder; (3) explore; and (4) share. In the first phase, teachers engage children in interesting and novel experiences that prompt them to take notice and to wonder. Next, they work with chi ldren to define and refine their questions, deciding on which questions are worth pursuing. In the explore phase, small groups engage in investigations to h y-pothesise and theorise, based on their findings. Chi ldren are then encouraged to share and discuss what they have learned, and then pose new questions for consideration. This methodology of teaching the Crea-tive and Cambridge Curriculum ensures that Berm uda’s children, from the start of their school career s, will develop creative and critical thinking, problem - solving , and collaboration —all skills of the 21 stcentury . Children entering Primary 1 in September 2017 will graduate in 2030 into a world where imagi-nation, investigation, invention, and innovation, the four I’s, will be the hallmarks for Bermuda’s success in a global society. The future of science, technology, engineering, arts , and mathematics (STEAM) educ ation will depend on the quality of teaching and the learning in these four I’ s. We envisage Bermuda’s children as lifelong learners having inquiring minds — that is, the ability to ask questions about important topics, research possibilities, develop their own h ypotheses and theories, and think critically and crea-tively, well prepared for the world they will encounter in 2030. Mr. Speaker, the Inquiring Minds Framework for Early Childhood Education was introduced in our public schools in September of 2015. The framework provides for an interview of the strategies that teac hers will us e in the classroom, such as creating a cu lture that builds on children’s questions and informal knowledge; providing rigorous problems that foster inquiry; posing higher -level questions to challenge children in their thinking; and providing opportunities for children to engage in small group investigations, to deeply probe and then to share. Mr. Speaker, the Inquiry Model is a shift in practice. It requires a systemic approach for impl ementation that must involve all stakeholders, including preschool administrators, principals, teachers , and para- educators. It starts with conversations about , What does an inquiry school look like, sound and feel like? Kath Murdoch, author of the book The Power of Inquiry: Teaching and Learning with Curiosity, Creati vity and Purpose in the Contemporary Classroom, indicated that key indicators of an inquiry school should include collaborative planning and open dialogue amongst staff, all teachers viewing themselves as i nquiry teachers, students and teachers using shared langua ge and shared approaches, and students ma king strong connections with local and global communi-ties. Mr. Speaker, this school year this systemic approach focused on teachers at the preschool and Primary 1 level, in that the strategies of the Inquiry Model were implemented. However, the strength of full implementation of the four inquiry phases and key inquiry strategies will require specific professional de-velopment training and in- school support during the next few years in order to experience the necessar y shifts in practice at each year level. In the end, when students can respond effectively to questions like 468 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly What are you learning? Why is it important? How is it real and meaningful in the world? What skills and strategies are you using? W e will then know our st udents are applying multiple learning strategies to u nderstand what they do and why. Mr. Speaker, honourable colleagues are aware that our public school students sit Cambridge exams in the P6, M2, and S2 levels. At these times, our students will be demonstrating thinking skills —for example, effectively solving mathematical problems, using a range of strategies; reading between the lines of text to infer meaning; and writing interesting essays that convey a well -reasoned argument. Since Inquiry is ap plicable to all subject content, the goal of the D epartment of Education is that it becomes an essential strategy for teaching and learning across the system at all levels and in all subjects. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I wish to thank all of our technical officers in the Department of Education who contributed to the development of the Inquiring Minds Framework, under the leadership of Dr. Llewe llyn Simmons, Director of Academics, and Dr. Sharon Speir, Assistant Director of Early Childhood Educ ation. We als o extend thanks to our school principals, preschool administrators, teachers, para- educators, and parents, who are supporting this initiative in order to ensure its success. We want our young people to be equipped with the critical skills necessary to effec-tively compete in the global economy. The Inquiring Minds Framework for Early Childhood Education is intended to ensure that our children are well pos itioned for the opportunities that their futures may hold. As a community, we must also support and help develop our future leaders, innovators, and d ynamic citizens, our children. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. The Chair will now recognise Minister GordonPamplin for a second Statement. SIGN AFTER RECEIPT (SAR) PERSONALISATIO N CHANGE TO UK AND BOTC PASSPORTS Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, on May 27 th, 2016, and July 15th, 2016, I presented Ministerial Statements …
Thank you, Minister. The Chair will now recognise Minister GordonPamplin for a second Statement.
SIGN AFTER RECEIPT (SAR) PERSONALISATIO N CHANGE TO UK AND BOTC PASSPORTS Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, on May 27 th, 2016, and July 15th, 2016, I presented Ministerial Statements that specif ically announced changes to British Overseas Territ ories Citize ns (BOTC) passport processes. Today I wish to present another change to the passport pr ocess, this time for both UK and BOTC passports. Mr. Speaker, with the goal to remove the r equirement in future for passport customers to send paper forms and printed photographs in support of their UK or BOTC passport applications, Her Majesty’s Passport Office (HMPO), effective as at January 28 th of 2017, are now requiring passport applicants to sign their passports after they are issued. The new feature is known as SAR, Sign after Receipt . With the effective date being almost two weeks ago, I wish to advise that the delay in this announcement relates to the Bermuda Passport Office, Department of Immigration, waiting for clarity on one aspect of the new process. That clarity was only received earlier this week. Mr. Speaker, a passport is not valid for travel without inclusion of a signature. To this end, passport holders should sign their passport (on page 3) as soon as they receive it. While clear customer guid-ance will be uploaded on the government portal, passport applicants sho uld know that the passport must be signed above the signature line, using black ink. For passport holders who are exempt from provi ding a signature (for example, children aged 11 or un-der, or those with disabilities who are unable to sign), the wording “The holder is not required to sign” or “The holder is unable to sign” will be automatically printed beneath the signature caption on page 2 of the passport. Mr. Speaker, in summary, the key messages relating to SAR include the following: 1. From January 28, 2017, passport appl icants for the BOTC passports will be required to sign their passport after it has been issued to them; 2. The inclusion of a handwritten signature brings the UK in line with passports issued by other countries such as the USA, France, Ireland, New Zea-land, and Canada; 3. With this change, BOTC passports continue to be highly secure and trusted documents that meet rigorous international standards; and 4. There is no change in the passport design, number of pages, application arrangements or processing timescales, and no additional security fea-tures have been added. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I confirm that applic ations for BOTC passports can still be submitted at the Bermuda Passport Office, Department of Immigration, on the first floor of the Government Administration Building on Parliament Street [Hamilton]. UK passport applications (which do not come under the remit of the Bermuda Passport Office) are completed online. For BOTC passport customers, the Bermuda Passport Office will continue to ensure that applic ations are sent to HMPO for printing and will contact passport customers for collection of their passports once they are returned from HMPO. For BOTC pas sport application forms and for more information relating to SAR (including questions and answers), pas sport customers should access the government portal at www.gov.bm , or call or visit the Bermuda Passport Office at the Department of Immigration. Thank you Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. And now, Minister Gordon- Pamplin, you have a third Statement on the National Training Board? Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I do. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. NATIONAL TRAINING BOARD ANNUAL REPORT 2014 TO 2016 Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Mr. Speaker, I rise …
Thank you, Minister. And now, Minister Gordon- Pamplin, you have a third Statement on the National Training Board?
Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I do. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
NATIONAL TRAINING BOARD ANNUAL REPORT 2014 TO 2016
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the National Training Board Annual Report 2014 through 2016 . In accordance with section 11(1) of the National Training Board Act 1997, “The Board shall, within three months after the end of each financial year forward to the Minister a report on the activities of the Board during that financial year and on the Board’s policy and programme for future years.” You will undoubtedly note that this annual report pr ovides information on activities for two years, 2014/15 and 2015/16. Mr. Speaker, I apologise for the delay in the production and tabling of the report, and I can assure you that future reports will be produced within the time frame prescribed in the legislation. Mr. Speaker, since the last annual report, some of the significant results recorded by the d epartment are as follows: a) an upgrade to the Job Board website; b) the creation of an update to the department policies and procedures to improve operation-al efficiency; c) success stories showcasing some very talen ted young people; d) information in respect of the Annual Summer Employment Programme; e) statistical information stemming from work ac-tivities in the Labour Relations Section; f) insight into the department’s collaborative partnership with internal and external stak eholders; and g) information highlighting the number of co mpanies participating in the Tax Waiver Pr ogramme.
Mr. Speaker, the Job Board remains a valuable tool to assist individuals with their search for suit able employment. In order to ensure that information stored on the system remains confidential, some s ecurity enhancements were made to protect the user. Further, adjustments were made to make the system more functional and to add broader reporting options for data gathering. Detailed job postings and infor-mation on work permit expiration dates are now avai lable to users of the system. Mr. Speaker, the Summer Employment Pr ogramme continues to be a success. This is a 10- week programme for college or university students to gain job experience that aligns to their coursework. A st ipend of $5,000 is awarded to each student upon successful completion of the programme. In 2014 there were 140 students who participated in the pr ogramme, and in 2015 the number decreased to 102 students. The decrease is as a result of a combined budgetary constraint, as well as sourcing students who met all of the requirements for eligibility. Mr. Speaker, the annual report aptly shows a number of success stories as testaments to the return on investment. Let us begin with Ms. Jessica A ndrade, who is a graduate of CedarBridge Academy and the current apprentice in the culinary arts at the Fairmont Southampton Hotel. Ms. Andrade has per-formed well in the kitchens of the Waterlot Inn, Ne wport Gastropub and Jasmine Lounge. She was eligible to write the Red Seal internationally recognised certif ication after completing 5,400 hours of work. We are proud to share in her accomplishment of obtaining her certification, which gives her global access to work opportunities. Mr. John Crockwell, also a former student of CedarB ridge Academy, is a recent graduate of the Certificate in Plumbing Programme at the Bermuda College. Currently working for Island Engineering, Mr. Crockwell had some early life challenges through which he has persevered, and he should be com-mended for his successes. He attributes some of that success to the assistance received from the Depar tment of Workforce Development. The department provided mentorship services and financial support towards tuition costs at the college. Mr. Ty-Rique Berkley experienced seamanship on board the Spirit of Bermuda and recently on the Picton Castle, a three -masted tall ship based in Nova Scotia. His ultimate goal is to attend Warsash Maritime Academy in Southampton, United Kingdom, to become a master mariner. During his six months’ tenure with the Picton Castle, he had the opportunity to visit the Azores, Morocco, the Canary Islands, Se negal, and the Windward Islands. Mr. Ricardo Graham -Ward, trainee civil eng ineer with the Department of Public Works, recently acquired his M aster s of Science Degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Southampton in the UK. His aspiration is to gain his chartered status in the near future. Excited about the opportunity to work on the reclamation project in Dockyard, Mr. Graham - Ward encourages more Bermudians, more young Bermudians, to pursue post -secondary education and certifications to enhance their career opportunities. I also have the pleasure of informing Honourable Members that Mr. Graham -Ward was one of the seven Bermudians selected by Aecon to participate in their internship programme. His internship with WSP Glob-al and Quinn Dressel Associates will allow him to fur-ther his career in civil and structural engineering. Mr. Jeneko Place received his Motorcycle Mechanic Technician Diploma from the Motorcycle Mechanics Institute in Orlando, Florida. He currently works for Cycle Zone. His advice to all young people is to follow your dreams and make decisions that will benefit your well -being. 470 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Speaker, the Overseas Funding Pr ogramm e supports up to 20 new students each year. Funding activities are tabled at the rear of the annual report, showing the number of students sponsored over the course of the last several years. In addition to academic achievements and financial need, the Awards Committee of the National Training Board based their selections on the students’ area of study and current economic activity in Bermuda. Mr. Speaker, the department continues to collaborate with industry partners to create opportunities for young, as piring Bermudians. In this issue of the annual report, you will find that work continues in earnest with the Bermuda Hospitality Institute, the Co nstruction Association of Bermuda, Financial Assi stance, and private businesses. There is a concerted effort to encourage businesses to invest in the deve lopment of Bermudians by using the Tax Waiver I ncentive Programme. In accordance with section 23 of the Payroll Tax Act 1995, employers can apply to the Tax Commissioner’s Office for a payroll tax waiver. Employe rs must provide highlights of their training programmes to develop Bermudians. The training must be accredited and approved by the department before consideration is given for tax credit. In 2014 there were nine organisations that received this credit, compared to seven in 2015. Mr. Speaker, in 2014/15, there were 661 l abour dispute inquiries lodged with the Labour Rel ations Section of the Department, of which 445 were consultations and 216 were complaints. Mr. Speaker, during the year of 2015/16, there were approximately 641 labour dispute inquiries lodged with the Labour Relations Section, of which 458 were consultations and 183 were complaints. One- hundred and sixty were complaints filed pursuant to the Employment Act 2000, and the twenty -three were grie vances reported pursuant to the Labour Relations Act 1975, the Trade Union Act 1965, and/or the Labour Disputes Act 1992. The majority of the complaints filed and investigated by the Labour Relations Officers in 2015/16 related to terminations and wages at 58 per cent and 20 per cent, respectively. The other 22 per cent consisted of complaints surrounding layoffs, redundancies, constructive dismissal, sick pay, and vacation pay. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the National Training Board, the D epartment of Workforce Development, and industry partners, who work so closely with the Government to ensure that training and development programmes are successful. It is these efforts that will ensure that Bermudians gain access to opportunities that will sui tably position them in the workforce. I would also like to thank, in particular, the Labour Relations Section of the Department, who work assiduously to ensure that the rights of workers are adequately protected. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Minister Cole Simons. You have the floor. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Good morning, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGood morning. MONITORING OUR EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: I rise today to brief my ho nourable colleagues and this House on our efforts to better understand the pressures that our exclusive economic zone [EEZ] is facing so that we can make any necessary adjustments to our …
Good morning.
MONITORING OUR EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: I rise today to brief my ho nourable colleagues and this House on our efforts to better understand the pressures that our exclusive economic zone [EEZ] is facing so that we can make any necessary adjustments to our management of this area in order to ensure sustainable resource use for not only our present, but future , generations. I am therefore happy to inform my honourable colleagues that the Ministry of the Environment is now in receipt of a final report from Satellite Applications Catapult , which reviewed the activity of vessels within and around Bermuda’s waters. Mr. Speaker, in 1996 an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles of ocean surrounding Bermuda was declared. Bermuda has rights over all nat ural resources within this EEZ, and the Island derives important economic value from these resources. Our commercial fishermen depend on the fisheries r esources found within the EEZ waters for their liveli-hoods, and critical foreign exchange is brought to Bermuda every year through visiting sports fishing vessels looking for “ the big one.” In a world where some 90 per cent of our fis hing stocks are either fully or over exploited, it is our responsibility to manage the resources under our care sustainably and to establish to what extent our r esources are under threat from outside fishing vessels. Bermuda has a significant legal deterrent to discour-age illicit activity in our waters. If a foreign vessel is convicted of fishing illegally in our waters, the Fisher-ies Act 1972 provides for a fine of up to $1 million, and confiscation of the vessel and the catch. The cha llenge is and continues to be how to effectively monitor such activities. Mr. Speaker, the technology that has put the oceans of the world under even more pressure can also be used to our advantage. Most large fishing vessels and their support craft have Automatic Ident ification Systems [AIS] fitted to their vessels as a saf ety and tracking tool. This device emits a signal. Ho wever, some fishing vessels are known to turn off their AIS tracking systems when close to a country’s EEZ, either because they wish not to be interrupted when taking innocent passage through an EEZ, or because they are fishing illegally. It is now possible to analyse AIS tracks via satellite in ways that will show fishing patterns, re- fuelling patterns , and journeys that myst erious ly continue with AIS and other identifiers switched off.
Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Speaker, in October 2016 Satellite Appl ications Catapult, a UK -based company , undertook a review of shipping activity data collected via satellite from 2013 to 2016. This review provided two ana lyses of vessel activity in a 300 -mile offshore study area. This was a three- year review of where vessels moved and in what time frame. The second study was a twoyear review of fishing vessel compliance with EEZ fishery rules. Mr. Speaker, the data were c ollected inside Bermuda’s 200- nautical -mile exclusive ec onomic zone and a surrounding 100- nautical -mile buf fer zone. This constituted the Bermuda area of inter-est. Catapult analysed Automatic Identification System signals broadcast from commercial vessels over 300 gross tons, as well as fishing vessels and pleasure vessels. Vessel identification, distribution and speed were examined to determine the likelihood of fishing activities in the area. These positional records and accompanying identity data were c ompared with relevant fishing vessel identities from dozens of sources, including all major Regional Fishery Ma nagement Organizations [RFMOs]. Mr. Speaker, the first review included the monitoring of 11,159 unique vessels broadcasting within the study area during the three- year period. Mr. Speaker, AIS operators have the option of how they broadcast their ship. For example, one day they broadcast as a commercial fishing boat; and the next day they broadcast themselves as another type of ship. Consequently, misreporting and/or missing shiptype information is common. As such, a second review was undertaken to look at all available data to identify specific compl iance threats around Bermuda’s EEZ. This review i nvestigated 9,434 individual tracks over a two-y ear period to identify the likely compliance of fishing vessels and fishing support vessels operating in or near Ber-muda’s EEZ, and to identify possible threats and make recommendations for high- risk or suspicious activities. As part of this assessment, every possible fishing vessel or fishing support vessel was reviewed for compliance with relevant fishery rules, as well as every vessel track with indications of possible fishing or fishing support activity in the Bermuda area of i nterest. Specific vessels were identified based on the risk level, with recommendations for follow -up invest igation of the vessels with greater possibility of non-compliance with our EEZ rules. Suspicious tracks were compared to relevant weather data at that time in that area to l ook for other drivers of abnormal track behaviour. Mr. Speaker, I would like to pause here to express my thanks on behalf of the Ministry of the E nvironment and the people of Bermuda, for the support of Mr. Dudley Cottingham and Aurum Fund Manag ement, who underwrote the cost of these important studies. This analysis gives us a much deeper under-standing of what is happening in our EEZ. The studies provide an important benchmark that can be used when analysing future activity. Mr. Speaker, the results of the three- year study showed that there were no strong seasonal or spatial trends in AIS activity that could potentially be associated with illegal fishing. However, the second, more specific review of fishing indicated some heightened fishing activity between November and May in the Bermuda area of interest. This increased fishing activity creates a slightly higher risk to the Bermuda EEZ of illegal incursions during those months. Mr. Speaker, the presence of fishing vessels transmitting on AIS is frequently an indicator that other non-transmitting fishing vessels are operating in the area, a hypothesis that was supported in 2015 by the persistent operation of a [carrier] vessel transmitting tracks consistent with transhipment. Also supporting this hypothesis, at least one fishing vessel ceased transmitting on AIS while engaged in fishing near the Bermuda EEZ in September 2015. Mr. Speaker, these two reports show that, while the probability of illegal fishing in our 200- mile exclusive economic zone appears to be low, there is some heightened fishing activity between November and May in our area of interest. This does not neces-sarily mean that the activity is illegal, but rather that we should be watchful that it is not. We should also develop effective measures to enforce the protection of our EEZ should there be an incident of illegal fis hing. However, these measures must be both cost - effective and flexible enough to address the need. Looking forward, the Department of the Env ironment and Natural Resources, guided by the Marine Resources Board, will now review the reports and propose recommendations for the appropriate level of monitoring needed to confirm suspicious fishing activ ity within our EEZ. These recommendations will form the cornerstone of a new Marine Resources Enforc ement Strategy that will look at ways and means to more effectively manage our coastal waters through to the outer edges of our EEZ. Ultimately, we want to conserve the resources in Bermuda’s waters for the long-term sustainable use. Mr. Speaker, with these brief remarks I now take my seat. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister Simons. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Minister of Health and Seniors, Minister Atherden. Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Good morning, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGood morning. 472 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly PREMIER’S YOUTH FITNESS PROGRAMME: THE PREMIER’S COUNCIL ON FITNESS, SPORTS AND NUTRITION Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Mr. Speaker and H onourable Members , last September the Premier, the Ministry of Health and Seniors, and the Ministry of …
Good morning.
472 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly PREMIER’S YOUTH FITNESS PROGRAMME: THE PREMIER’S COUNCIL ON FITNESS, SPORTS AND NUTRITION
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Mr. Speaker and H onourable Members , last September the Premier, the Ministry of Health and Seniors, and the Ministry of Educ ation launched the Premier’s Youth Fitness Program me under the Premier’s Council on Fitness, Sports and Nutrition . The programme is provided through schools and is designed to help our children on the path to a lifetime of good health. Mr. Speaker, you may recall seeing in the media the Honourable Premier and Minister Scott d oing push- ups in Dellwood’s auditorium under their school’s banner of Deeds not Words . It is my heartfelt belief and practice that everyday fitness and a good diet are the building blocks for a long and active life, and that good health underpins both quality of life and achievement. Mr. Speaker, I know I do not need to remind us that Bermudians are not getting adequate levels of nutrition or physical activity. Indeed, the state of our population’s health is not satisfactory .Overall, three in four adults are overweight or obese, and one in four has at least one chronic non- communicable disease. This reduces quality of life for our people and increases the need for expensive medical treatments for diseases like cancer, circulatory disease, or diabetes. Mr. Speaker, both poor habits on nutrition and exercise begin in childhood, so if we are to reverse this trend, we have to address our young people. Mr. Speaker, the Premier’s Council on Fitness, Sports and Nutrition is intent on raising our children’s awareness of what their growing bodies need to succeed. After awareness, the next step is for them to adopt good habits and to own, value, and nurture their health. Mr. Speaker, within this programme, schoolchildren have their core and upper body strength, flex-ibility, body composition, and aerobic capacity regular-ly measured by their PE teachers under the oversight of Mr. Arnold Manders, the Education Ministry’s Edu-cation Officer. Children and their parents are receiving guidance for improved activity and nutrition. We want our kids in the Healthy Fitness Zone, which is reflec ted in lifestyles that feature regular exercise and healthy eating as day -to-day activities. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the members of the Premier’s Council and all the schools that have been busy implementing the programme in the four months since its launch. Also, many thanks to our Well Bermuda Partners, who are each arising to do their part in this team effort. PE teachers have com-pleted the first round of Fitnes sGram Assessments, and the Spirit System application training and Heart Rate training is happening this month, to coincide with schools’ midterm break. By the end of March, all P5 to S3 students will be wearing heart rate monitoring d evices during their PE classes. Mr. Speaker, Ms. Cholay Joell, the Case Manager for the Premier’s Youth Fitness Programme, will work in conjunction with the PE teachers to su pport students identified as at -risk for overweight, ob esity, or underweight, and whose FitnessGram res ults place them outside of the Healthy Fitness Zone for each of the fitness components: aerobic and anaer obic endurance, flexibility, strength, and BMI (body composition). Each identified student will have an i ndividualized wellness plan to include a team approach with parents, the PE teacher, school counsellor, the student, Nutrition Services, and possibly his or her physician. The council is promoting the importance of choosing water instead of sugary beverages, and cur-rently there are 15 schools with water -only policies. Mr. Speaker, the Bermuda Diabetes Association has donated EatWell Bermuda Plates for all P5 and P6 students. These plates show clearly that half our plate should be vegetables! The visual image of the EatWell Plate is a great learning tool not only for children, but also for many adults. I recommend that you post it in your kitchens at home and at work as a reminder of a balanced diet and healthy portion sizes. On March 21 st, 2017, the Healthy School Lunch Challenge Awards will be held at the Argus Group Headquarters to recognise schools, students, and families who are walking the talk when it comes to health school lunches. Mr. Speaker, the Premier’s Council on Fitness, Sports and Nutrition website, www.stepitup.bm, is currently under construction by the Bermuda Yellow Pages, and is expected to launch next month with help from BF&M. The Premier and I are excited by the potential of this programme, and the Premier himself and I have accompanied Marie Beach- Johnson (from the Department of Health) to school assemblies to pr omote the programme and encourage the children. Mr. Speaker, thank you again to all our par tners in this effort to create a healthy and strong Ber-muda. Let’s keep the momentum going together. This is a can-do programme, Mr. Speaker, and we believe that we can reverse the trend on obesity in Bermuda. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Minister. The Chair will now recognise Minister Ric hards. You have the floor. CONVENTION ON THE ELIMINATION OF A LL FORMS OF DISCRMINATION AGAINST WOMEN Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to inform Honourable Members of this House that the Bermuda …
Thank you, Honourable Minister. The Chair will now recognise Minister Ric hards. You have the floor.
CONVENTION ON THE ELIMINATION OF A LL FORMS OF DISCRMINATION AGAINST WOMEN
Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to inform Honourable Members of this House that the Bermuda Government has formally requested the United Kingdom to take the necessary steps to have the Convention on the Elimination
Bermuda House of Assembly of all forms of Discrimination against Women (co mmonly referred to as CEDAW) extended to Bermuda. In this regard, I note that on Monday, February 6th, 2017, the Honourable Premier Michael Dunkley pr esented a letter of request to have CEDAW extended to Right Honourable Baroness Anelay, the UK Mini ster of State of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office responsible for the Overseas Territories. Mr. Speaker, CEDAW is the landmark international agreement that affirms principles of fundamental human rights and equality for women around the world and is often referred to as the Women’s Bill of Rights . It is one of the core international human rights treaties of the United Nations treaty system, which requires member states to undertake legal obligations to respect, protect , and fulfil human rights. Mr. Speaker, CEDAW was adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 19 th, 1979, coming into force as a treaty on December 3rd, 1981. Today, CEDAW is one of the most widely endorsed human rights treaties and has been ratified or acceded to by 189 countries to date, including the United Kingdom , who signed the treaty in July 1981 and ratified CEDAW in 1986. Three British Overseas Territories — namely, the British Virgin Islands, the Turks & Caicos Islands and the Falkland Islands —had the Convention extended in 1986. Two further Overseas Territories, Anguilla and the Cayman Islands, had CEDAW extended in March 2016. Mr. Speaker, the articles of CEDAW fall into three main groups: The first set of articles explains the nature and scope of the state’s obligations; the sec-ond set of articles targets speci fic forms of discrimin ation and outlines measures that the state must under-take to eliminate discrimination in each of these areas; and the last set of articles governs procedural and administrative matters, including the CEDAW repor ting process. Mr. Speaker, the Convention defines discrim ination against women as “any distinction, exclusion , or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment , or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil , or any other field.” Mr. Speaker, countries that have ratified, acceded to, or have had CEDAW extended are legally obligated to work towards implementing its provisions and are also committed to monitoring and reporting on the measures they have taken to comply with their treaty obligations. Mr. Speaker, in 2014 , the UK Government commenced a project focusing on the work required to take forward the extension of CEDAW to outstanding Overseas Territories in accordance with recommendations from the UN CEDAW Committee. The U K Go vernment Equalities Office (or GEO ) developed a CEDAW compliance template to assist the O verseas Territories in gathering and submitting the relevant evidence. This consisted of a number of thematically organised indicators of compliance, drawn from CEDAW’s substantive a rticles and the committee’s general recommendations. The 13 themes pertained to civil legal matters , criminal legal matters , discrim ination, health , nationality , education, trafficking and exploitation , rural women, migrant women, governance, family life , political and public life , and emplo yment. Once Bermuda completed these templates , they were sent for review to the UK Government , which determined that Bermuda was in a good pos ition to request that CEDAW be extended. Mr. Speaker, when governments become parties to a convention, they can identify that they will not be bound to particular elements of that treaty. This is known as “entering a reservation ,” and is permitted under article 28 of CEDAW. In undertaking the compliance work necessary to determine whether Berm uda is ready for the extension of CEDAW, the Ministry of Social Development and Sports and the Attorney - General’s Chambers determined that two r eservations would be necessary. Mr. Speaker, the two r eservations relate to article 1 and article 15(4) of the Convention. Article 1 of CEDAW defines discrimination ( which I described a few minutes ago), and article 15(4) states that “cou ntries shall accord to men and women the same rights with regard to the law relating to the movement of persons and the freedom to choose their residence and domicile.” Mr. Speaker, the first reservation will preserve the position whereby Bermuda can continue to co nscript only male recruits to the Royal Bermuda Regiment and that religious organisations would not be compelled to have women priests. The second r eservation will preserve the right of the existing constit utional and immigration provisions, which have the effect of discriminating against a Bermudian woman married to a non- Bermudian husband, due to the lesser rights granted to a non- Bermudian man compared to a non- Bermudian woman married to a Bermudian man. To elaborate , Mr. Speaker, section 11(2 )(d)of the Bermuda Constitution imposes restrictions on the movement or residence within Bermuda of any person who does not belong to Bermuda. Under section 11(5)(c), a foreign national wife belongs to Bermuda if, by decree of a court or a deed of separation, she does not live apart from a husband who possesses Berm udian status, or a husband who has been granted a certificate of naturalis ation. However, section 11(5 )(c) does not apply to the foreign national husband of a wife who possesses Bermudian status. Section 27A of the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Act 1956 provides for an additional condition to apply to the for-eign national husband of a wife who possesses Ber-mudian status in order for him to remain and reside in 474 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Bermuda—for example, that he has no relevant convictions. Mr. Speaker, while the Government recognises and intends to address this inequality in due course, it was determined that the appropriate course of action is to have the Convention extended now and work toward removing this reservation. As CEDAW is an aspirational treaty , Bermuda must and will focus on improving gender equality to ensure that women and girls enjoy the same access to opportunities and be nefits in every aspect of life. Mr. Speaker, as an Overseas Territory of the United Kingdom, Bermuda will be required to take the UK’s reservations. The Attorney General’s Chambers have reviewed the UK’s reservations and determined that there is no legal impediment, nor will there be any negative impact , in doing so. Mr. Speaker, although the work on completing the UK compliance templates commenced in 2014, considerable time and effort have been expended by a number of persons over the past 15 years in wor king towards having CEDAW extended, and I congrat ulate all those involved. Once the Convention has been extended, work will begin on identifying areas of policy and legislation to enhance Bermuda’s compliance with CEDAW. Thank you, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Thank you, Mini ster. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere are none. QUESTION PERIOD
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust before we get into the Question Period, as we get into the Question Period, we want to point out that MP Foggo has asked that her questions to R. W. Scott be carried over till next week. [Pause]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Members, we are now in the Question Period. And we will begin where we left off last week. I believe there were questions from the Leader of the Opposition to the Premier, [answers to which] the Premier was to come with today. Yes, Leader of the Opposition. QUESTION 1: …
Honourable Members, we are now in the Question Period. And we will begin where we left off last week. I believe there were questions from the Leader of the Opposition to the Premier, [answers to which] the Premier was to come with today. Yes, Leader of the Opposition.
QUESTION 1: PROTEST AT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY AND THE BERMUDA POLICE SERVICE Hon. E. David Burt: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, will the Honourable Premier please inform this Honourable House the dates and times of the conversations he had with any members of the Bermuda Police Service on December 1 st and 2nd, 2016, regarding the protests at the House of A ssembly?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPremier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, none on the 1 st. On the 2nd was 8:29 am, 10:15 am, 11:06, 11:45, 1:12 and 5:55 pm.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Thank you. Yes, supplementary, MP Burt. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As a supplementary question.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. SUPPLEMENTARIES Hon. E. David Burt: The Premier did read that quite fast. So I will ask him to possibly slow down so that we can record —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerDo you want him to repeat it for you? Hon. E. David Burt: If he could, I would appreciate that.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Premier, if you would. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: I also have a copy, Mr. Speaker, which I will be happy to furnish.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay. Good. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: [It was] 8:29 am, 10:15, 11:06, 11:45, 1:12 pm, 5:55 pm.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, your supplementary. MP Scott, you have a supplementary? Hon. Michael J. Scott: I have a supplementary. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Would the Premier confirm to the House that all conversations with the Commi ssioner of Police up to 11:45 am in the morning were with reference to what matters unfolding and in rel ation to the protests?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPremier. Hon. Micha el H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, convers ations I had with the Commissioner up until 1:12 were in regards to when we were going to be able to gain access to the House. Bermuda House of Assembly The Speaker: Thank you, Premier. Yes, second supplementary, MP Scott. Hon. …
Premier. Hon. Micha el H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, convers ations I had with the Commissioner up until 1:12 were in regards to when we were going to be able to gain access to the House.
Bermuda House of Assembly The Speaker: Thank you, Premier. Yes, second supplementary, MP Scott.
Hon. Michael J. Scott : So, in regard to managing the logistics of the Government returning to the House, was there a discussion about use of the police riot unit? (You will forgive me if I do not get its complete name right.) Were there discussions between yourself and the Commissioner about the use of the police riot unit to assist this objective of getting the Government into this place?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPremier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, as I said before, police operations are in the remit of the Commi ssioner, and that is where it stands.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member D. P. Lister for a supplementary. Yes. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, would the Honourable Premier confirm who the six phone calls were that took place on December 2 nd? Who did he speak to on …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPremier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The Commissioner of Police.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Honourable Member, another supplementary? Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Yes, another supplementary.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Just for clarity, all six were with the Commissioner of Police? [No audible response] Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, thank you. MP Burt. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou have a supplementary? Hon. E. David Burt: As a supplementary question —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. E. David Burt: The Honourable Premier just stated on the floor of Parliament that he had six phone calls with the members of Bermuda Police Service. And in these six phone calls of which he has listed here, he said that all of those phone calls were with …
Yes. Hon. E. David Burt: The Honourable Premier just stated on the floor of Parliament that he had six phone calls with the members of Bermuda Police Service. And in these six phone calls of which he has listed here, he said that all of those phone calls were with the Commissioner of Police. Would the Honourable Premier please confirm to us that he had no telephone conversations with any other member of the Bermuda Police Service on that day?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPremier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: That is correct, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. The Chair will recognise MP Weeks.
Mr. Michael A. WeeksMr. Speaker, the Premier acknowledged that he had a conversation with the Commissioner of Police at 1:00 pm concerning getting into Parliament. Are we to believe that during that conversation, the Commissioner did not reveal to the Premier how he was going to get the protesters away from the gate …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPremier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: That is correct, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Premier. All right. Thank you, Honourable Members. The Chair will now call on the Honourable Member from constituency 17, MP Walton Brown.
Mr. Walton BrownThis is in relation to the Stat ement of the Premier or something else?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo, this is the questions that you had, yes. QUESTION 1: NUMBER OF PRC APPLICATIONS APPROVED FOR EACH YEAR SINCE 2010
Mr. Walton BrownQuestions. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The question is for the Honourable Minister for Home Affairs: Will the Honourable Minister please 476 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly inform this Honourable House of the number of PRC applications and approvals for each year since 2010?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in response I am going to go down the tabulation and the year, from 2010/11, 2012/13, 2014/15 and 2016 up until the 29 th of November. And I will show those submitted and those approved in each of …
Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in response I am going to go down the tabulation and the year, from 2010/11, 2012/13, 2014/15 and 2016 up until the 29 th of November. And I will show those submitted and those approved in each of those years. • In 2010— 51 submitted, 75 approved; • In 2011— zero submitted, 7 approved.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSorry, what’s that, 51? Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Fifty-one submi tted and—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAnd 70 approved? Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: Seventy -five a pproved. I will explain that, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. I do not understand it. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: It was a timing difference.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerBut you might know something I do not know, Honourable Member. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I will explain that.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI do not understand it. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I will explain it, Mr. Speaker, if you will just permit me to do the tabulation. And then I can explain the differences. [Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSo, it is not only 51, but you are adding in others that were applied earlier, at an earlier time.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThat is correct. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes. The question was, What approvals were there for each year?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI see. I understand that. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: So I am basically saying that, in 2010, I had 51 submitted, but there were 75 approved —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSo some of those approved were from the previous year — Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: —I can explain that the difference was approvals in 2010 for prior years that had been put in.
The SpeakerThe Speaker—Okay. I have it. I have it. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: So, in 2011, I had zero submitted, but seven were approved. In 2012, I had one submitted, zero approved. In 2013, there was one submitted, zero approved. In 2014, there were 58 submitted, 31 approved. And in 2015, …
—Okay. I have it. I have it. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: So, in 2011, I had zero submitted, but seven were approved. In 2012, I had one submitted, zero approved. In 2013, there was one submitted, zero approved. In 2014, there were 58 submitted, 31 approved. And in 2015, there were 57 submitted, 73 approved. And in 2016, there were 39 submitted and 15 were approved. These were for the 31As [section 31A of the Bermuda Immigration and Protect Act 1956]. We also have the category of the 31Bs, which are the over -18 ordinary resident of Bermuda, the 10year—section 31B of the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Act. And again, the same years —for 2010, there were 103 submitted and 134 approved. For 2011, there were 40 submitted, 53 approved. In 2012, there were 38 submitted, 26 were approved. In 2013, there were 41 submitted, but 16 approved. In 2014, there were 55 submi tted and 37 approved. And in 2015, there were 83 submitted, 88 were approved. And in 2016 up until the 29 th of November, which is the date of the compilation of this information, there were 56 submitted and 25 approved. And as I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, to be noted, generally the difference between applications submitted and approved is due to any of the following: processing timelines, advertising requirements, or r equests for additional information, and refusal. In addi-tion, the significant decrease in applications received on 31As between 2011 and 2013 is due to the change in law, when the Incentives for Job Makers Act was amended to legislate an earlier eligibility date for PRCs. As a result, the peak under section 31A began in 2014.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAl l right. Thank you. MP Brown, again, you have a supplementary on that? SUPPLEMENTARIES
Mr. Walton BrownA supplementary, yes. Mr. Speaker, so, obviously the increase was because of the reduction in fee paid for the PRC ap-plication. My question for the Minister is, Given that the Incentives for Job Makers Act was designed to ensure that those companies involved in international bus iness had the ability …
A supplementary, yes. Mr. Speaker, so, obviously the increase was because of the reduction in fee paid for the PRC ap-plication. My question for the Minister is, Given that the Incentives for Job Makers Act was designed to ensure that those companies involved in international bus iness had the ability to have security of tenure for their employees and therefore generate a stronger revenue stream for the country, is the Minister at all concerned that we are now seeing a trend whereby companies which have no connection to international business
Bermuda House of Assembly whatsoever are being recognised as being suitably qualified to apply for and receive PRC?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes. Mr. Speaker, I do not think that “concern” is perhaps the appropriate word. We certainly recognise that this exists. And I think that this is an attempt to ensure that companies and generation of funds into our economy, that companies rank pari passu. …
Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes. Mr. Speaker, I do not think that “concern” is perhaps the appropriate word. We certainly recognise that this exists. And I think that this is an attempt to ensure that companies and generation of funds into our economy, that companies rank pari passu. So it is not necessarily only international companies, international business companies that are eligible. Based on the legislation, it does not differentiate between international business and local companies. Hence, local companies, if they meet the qualifying criteria for the numbers of e mployees that they hold, they may have an executive who will qualify in this particular category.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. Yes, MP Brown, you have another suppl ementary?
Mr. Walton BrownSo, would the Minister therefore accept as appropriate that a grocery store chain such as Marketplace, which has now applied for five PRC applications for its top five executives, would be a suitable beneficiary of the Job Makers Act?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I would have to have a look at the legislation that surrounds it. And I would be happy to share that information and to bring that response back. But I do not know about the specific case to which he has referred, but I …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Thank you, Mini ster. The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 18. The Leader of the O pposition, you have a supplementary? Hon. E. David Burt: Yes, Mr. Speaker, supplementary question and a follow -up to the last question asked.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Yes. Hon. E. David Burt: Does the Minister believe that, under the Job Makers Act, PRCs should be awarded to companies that are not creating jobs in Bermuda? I do not believe that the Marketplace can be considered as a job that is at risk of fleeing, and that …
Yes. Yes. Hon. E. David Burt: Does the Minister believe that, under the Job Makers Act, PRCs should be awarded to companies that are not creating jobs in Bermuda? I do not believe that the Marketplace can be considered as a job that is at risk of fleeing, and that is what the Job Makers Act was put in place for. Can the Minister state the policy of the Government whether or not it feels that companies such as the Marketplace, local companies with no risk of leaving the Island, should be eligible for PRCs under Incentives for Job Makers legislation?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: No. I think I can respond again by saying that if a company qualifies based on the criteria that is set aside in the Act, then they are eligible to make the application. That is as much as I can share at this point.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerT hank you. Yes, MP Burt. Second supplementary? Hon. E. David Burt: Second supplementary, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. E. David Burt: I understand that someone may be eligible to make the application. The question was Is it the policy of the Government to give PRCs under the Incentives for Job Makers Act for local companies such as the Marketplace who may apply? We know why Job …
Yes. Hon. E. David Burt: I understand that someone may be eligible to make the application. The question was Is it the policy of the Government to give PRCs under the Incentives for Job Makers Act for local companies such as the Marketplace who may apply? We know why Job Makers was put in place. It was put in place for the international sector and people who are creating jobs in Bermuda. [Will] the Minister state what the Government’s position is in regards to the awarding of PRCs to local companies under the Incentives for Job Makers Act?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think it can be seen that companies such as the Marketplace, as has been spec ified in the question, are clearly providing jobs for Bermudians. I believe the further concern that the Honourable Member has is whether …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust a minute. I think that one thing I have got to say —just a minute. Members in the Gallery, I would like to remind members in the Gallery that they make no movement. They make no reaction to anything that is happening inside this House if you would like …
Just a minute. I think that one thing I have got to say —just a minute. Members in the Gallery, I would like to remind members in the Gallery that they make no movement. They make no reaction to anything that is happening inside this House if you would like to stay in the Gal-lery. Carry on.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I will just repeat that if the specific company clearly can be seen to be creating jobs for 478 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Bermudians, the question that the Honourable Me mber had was in fact whether they are likely to flee in the absence of the Job Makers. And I can only reiter-ate that the condition of the legislation provides the company to identify the criteria and to make applic ations accordingly. So I will have a further look to give the Honourable Member any further information that I can share.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay. Thank you, Minister. MP Brown.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. QUESTION 2: REGISTRY GENERAL COLLECTING SUICIDE STA TISTICS
Mr. Walton BrownWill the Honourable Minister please inform this Honourable House if the Registry General is now or has been instructed to begin col-lecting statistics on suicides in Bermuda?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Registry General currently does not collect statistics on suicides in Bermuda, nor has the department been instructed to begin collecting statistics on suicides. The Registry General’s principal responsibility is to record vital events in Bermuda—for example, …
Yes, Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Registry General currently does not collect statistics on suicides in Bermuda, nor has the department been instructed to begin collecting statistics on suicides. The Registry General’s principal responsibility is to record vital events in Bermuda—for example, births, deaths, marriages, and adoptions in respect to the resident population. Though the Registry General receives information from the coroner’s office and local funeral homes with respect to deaths, the department does not compile statistical data as to the cause of death, such as cancer or suicide. It should also be remembered that there are privacy issues with respect to releasing information on suicide. In Bermuda, suicides are fairly rare occur-rences and a very sensitive topic to the decedent’s families, and not a matter of public records. The Ep idemiology and Surveillance Unit at the Ministry of Health is the unit that compiles data on the causes of death and can thus provide statistical data respecting suicides.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. MP Brown, do you have a supplementary? SUPPLEMENTARIES
Mr. Walton BrownYes. Recognising the sensitivity to families on this matter and calling for the publication of aggregate data as opposed to individual data, will the Minister agree that it is important to understand the nature and extent of such an issue so that we know how best to respond to it? …
Yes. Recognising the sensitivity to families on this matter and calling for the publication of aggregate data as opposed to individual data, will the Minister agree that it is important to understand the nature and extent of such an issue so that we know how best to respond to it? It is a growing concern in a number of jurisdictions, especially in light of some of the permutations on social media and the bullying and so forth. Will the Minister at least recog-nise, accept, that it is a matter that we require accurate, if not only aggregated, data on?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will agree with the Honourable Member. But I do believe that the repository for that information, which is now the Department of Health, I believe that to be the appropriate place, because, as I indicated, they cap-ture causes of death. …
Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will agree with the Honourable Member. But I do believe that the repository for that information, which is now the Department of Health, I believe that to be the appropriate place, because, as I indicated, they cap-ture causes of death. And they keep the statistics there. And I believe the question is best put to the Health Minister. But they can actually produce and publish statistics on an aggregate basis if required.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. Yes, MP Brown, your second supplementary?
Mr. Walton BrownGiven that this question is for the Minister for Home Affairs, will this Minister undertake to persuade her colleague to publicise such relevant data?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: We can certainly have that conversation. I am happy to have that con-versation with my colleague.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerTh ank you. Yes, the Chair will recognise MP Brown again for your third question. QUESTION 3: EMPLOYERS’ COMPLIANCE WITH LABOUR AND IMMIGRATION LAWS
Mr. Walton BrownYes, my third question: Will the Honourable Minister please advise this Honourable House if the Department of Immigration and/or D epartment of Workforce Development currently conduct unannounced checks on employers to determine compliance levels with labour and immigration laws, and if so, what is the extent of this undertaking? Hon. …
Yes, my third question: Will the Honourable Minister please advise this Honourable House if the Department of Immigration and/or D epartment of Workforce Development currently conduct unannounced checks on employers to determine compliance levels with labour and immigration laws, and if so, what is the extent of this undertaking?
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in response, the Department of Immigration conducts unannounced checks on e mployers when it has a reasonable suspicion, such as a complaint from the public, that an employer is not in
Bermuda House of Assembly compliance with immigration laws. There is currently a large volume of investigations being dealt with by the Compliance Section of the Department of Immigration. In regards to the Department of Workforce Development, the labour legislation limits the depar tment’s ability to conduct unannounced checks on em-ployers to determine compliance levels unless allegations of non- compliance are brought to its attention. In accordance with the labour legislation, which for the purpose of this point, excludes the Employment Act 2000, any person party to a dispute may report the same to the Director of Workforce Development, who shall endeavour to conciliate the parties and effect a settlement by all means at his disposal. In accordance with the Employment Act 2000, an employee ma y make a complaint to an inspector within the Labour Relations Section, or if the inspector has reasonable grounds to believe that an employer has failed to comply with any of the provisions of the Employment Act 2000, the inspector shall inquire into the matter and endeavour to conciliate the parties and effect a settlement by all means at his disposal. In regard to job categories that require certif ication, the Standards and Enforcement Officer under section 14(2)(a) of the National Occupational Certif ication Act 2004 may “at any reasonable time, enter and inspect any premises in which he has reasonable grounds for believing that a person is, or has been within the previous six months, working in a designat-ed occupation.” However, under section 14(3)(a), (b)and [(c)], he “shall on the occasion of the . . .inspection, notify the employer or his represent ative of his presence, and produce if required to do so, appropriate identification; and (c) shall, if required by the employer, be accompanied during any i nspection or examination by the employer or his representative.” The undertaking of the Standards and E nforcement Officer is to verify that the requirements for anyone working in a designated occupation to be na-tionally certified and duly registered with the Depar tment of Workforce Development.
Mr. Walton BrownDoes the Honourable Minister appreciate that there are a significant number of low - paid employees who face tremendous intimidation and pressure in the workplace, who are disinclined because of that intimidation to raise matters of concerns with the relevant government authorities? And does the Minister not appreciate or agree …
Does the Honourable Minister appreciate that there are a significant number of low - paid employees who face tremendous intimidation and pressure in the workplace, who are disinclined because of that intimidation to raise matters of concerns with the relevant government authorities? And does the Minister not appreciate or agree that a more proactive approach should be under taken to ensure a measure of protection and justice for low -paid employees? Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Mr. Speaker, I thank the Honourable Member for that question. Let me in response indicate that intimidation is not good for anybody, to feel that they cannot speak up when they have challenges in the workplace. But it is also important for employees who feel aggrieved in such circumstances to understand that they can have, I think in legal terms it is called “a next friend,” or som ething to that eff ect—a next friend who can actually advocate on their behalf without necessarily exposing them, the employee who is aggrieved, to a level of either intimidation or retaliation as a result. If we receive specific information, we can certainly have it invest igated by the department.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you. Thank you, MP Brown. That completes your questions. MP Wilson, you were asking for yours to be carried over, were you?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. MP Wilson’s will be carried over till next week. The Chair will now recognise the Leader of the Opposition, MP David Burt, from constituency 18. QUESTION 1: TOTAL FUNDS PAID TO BENNETT JONES FROM JANUARY 1, 2014 Hon. E. David Burt: Mr. Speaker, Would the Honourable …
All right. Thank you. MP Wilson’s will be carried over till next week. The Chair will now recognise the Leader of the Opposition, MP David Burt, from constituency 18.
QUESTION 1: TOTAL FUNDS PAID TO BENNETT JONES FROM JANUARY 1, 2014
Hon. E. David Burt: Mr. Speaker, Would the Honourable Minister please inform this Honourable House the total funds paid to Bennett Jones from January 1, 2014?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I can confirm that $4,144,333.02 has been paid to Bennett Jones over the three- year period from January 2014 to January 31 st, 2017. I might elaborate on the answer. I think these answers are in the public …
Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I can confirm that $4,144,333.02 has been paid to Bennett Jones over the three- year period from January 2014 to January 31 st, 2017. I might elaborate on the answer. I think these answers are in the public domain already. But if you permit me to proceed, if that is okay?
The S peaker: Is that all right?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Okay. You do not have to answer. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Okay. Thank you. Hon. E. David Burt: Question number 2, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. 480 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly QUESTIONS 2: TOTAL PENALTY FEES PAID TO CREDITORS BY THE GOVERNMENT Hon. E. David Burt: Would the Honourable Minister please inform this Honourable House the total penalty fees paid to Bermuda’s creditors as a result of Gov-ernment of …
Yes. 480 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly QUESTIONS 2: TOTAL PENALTY FEES PAID TO CREDITORS BY THE GOVERNMENT
Hon. E. David Burt: Would the Honourable Minister please inform this Honourable House the total penalty fees paid to Bermuda’s creditors as a result of Gov-ernment of Bermuda financials being submitted late for the years 2015 and 2016?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Initially, it should be noted that this covenant only relates to investors holding Bermuda Gover nment private placement notes and does not relate to our public bonds issued in the 144A/Reg S markets. The total penalty fees paid to Bermuda’s …
Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Initially, it should be noted that this covenant only relates to investors holding Bermuda Gover nment private placement notes and does not relate to our public bonds issued in the 144A/Reg S markets. The total penalty fees paid to Bermuda’s private placement noteholders as a result of the Bermuda Government’s financials being submitted late for the years 2015 and 2016 are as follows: for year -end 2015 —$410,000; for 2016 —$640,000.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 29. MP Zane De Silva, you have the floor. SUPPLEMENTARIES Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank you, thank you. Minister, can you tell us —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSupplementary, right? Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: —who the private plac ement holders are, please?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I do not have a list of the private placement holders. I do not have that infor-mation.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, MP. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes. Will the Minister give an undertaking to give that to us at his earliest con-venience?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, sure. Yes.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Hon. E. David Burt: Supple mentary, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, you have a supplementary. Carry on, MP Burt. Hon. E. David Burt: I thank the Minister for his a nswer. Can the Minister please inform this Honourable House what steps he is taking to ensure that we do not continue to pay fees for the government’s financials being late?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The reason that these late payments were made was because (a) there was a new management team at the Accountant General’s Department, particularly senior team. And there were delays in the audit. There was a delay in the sign- off for …
Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The reason that these late payments were made was because (a) there was a new management team at the Accountant General’s Department, particularly senior team. And there were delays in the audit. There was a delay in the sign- off for the audit in 2016, in particular. So it is not that the financials were not done; it was that the audit was not complete by that period of time. These audits —these notes have a r equirement, a condition that audited financial stat ements are given to noteholders six months after the year end. And in these two occasions, that was not done. Of course, the question that the Honourable Member asked, the obvious answer is yes, we are working to make sure that this problem is resolved.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Yes, thank you. Member from constituency 29, do you have a supplementary? Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker, number —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSorry . You have already had two supplementaries. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: No. I only had one, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou had two. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: No, sir.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe second one was the answer “yes.” [Crosstalk]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere was just one answer. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Well, I just asked if he was going to give an undertaking—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. That is a question, Honourable Member. Sorry. [Laughter] The Sp eake r: Any other questions here? [Pause] Bermuda House of Assembly The Speaker: We now move to the Honourable Member from constituency 13, D. V. S. Rabain. QUESTION 1: NEARSHORE MARINE SPATIAL PLANNING UPDATE
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainThank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Honourable Minister please give an update to this Honourable House on the status of the following: t he work regarding developing Nearshore Marine Spatial Planning for Bermuda, initiated as a public/ private partnership between the Government of Bermuda, the Waitt Foundation, and the Bermuda …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Honourable Minister please give an update to this Honourable House on the status of the following: t he work regarding developing Nearshore Marine Spatial Planning for Bermuda, initiated as a public/ private partnership between the Government of Bermuda, the Waitt Foundation, and the Bermuda Institute for Ocean Science [BIOS]; and the total amount of public monies spent on this work to date?
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Working in partnership with the Waitt Foundation and the Bermuda Institute of Ocean Sciences, the Department of Conservation Services and Environmental Protection produced the following reports: a background report entitled “Mak-ing the Case for Marine Spatial Planning in Bermuda”; the second report is a statement of participation ent itled “Exploring Marine Spatial Planning in Bermuda.” Mr. Speaker, government departments, the Marine Resource Board, the Historic Wrecks Author ity, and the Port Authority, as well as various other stakeholder bodies, were consulted in the develo pment of these reports. These reports are currently held with the Ministry of the Environment and are available for anyone’s consideration. Additionally, BIOS and the Waitt Foundation commissioned the Environmental Law Institute to d evelop the following reports: “Healthy Options for a Bermuda Nearshore Marine Spatial Planning Pr ocess,” and two, “Legal Context for Nearshore Marine Spatial Planning in Bermuda.” Again, these two r eports are presently in draft form. No monies were spent on this project. The Ministry of the Environment would like to thank the Waitt Foundation and BIOS for their financial support in this endeavour.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSupplementary, yes. SUPPLEMENTARY
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainWould the Honourable Minister tell us if the Department of Planning has the sufficient capacity and training to deal with marine spatial planning? Or will this be the responsibility of a different department?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: I would like to thank my Shadow for the question. At this point in time, we are reviewing all information and will be working with the Department of Planning and the other resources to craft the most appropriate spatial plans for the coun-try. As …
Minister. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: I would like to thank my Shadow for the question. At this point in time, we are reviewing all information and will be working with the Department of Planning and the other resources to craft the most appropriate spatial plans for the coun-try. As I said, we have done studies that will provide a roadmap of how to craft such a plan. And we have taken inputs from stakeholders who have experience in this area, and we are taking their advice on how best to move forward with participation from stak eholders within government and outside of government. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMP Rabain with the second question. QUESTION 2: NEARSHORE MARINE SPATIAL PLANNING UPDATE
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainWould the Honourable Minister please share with this Honourable House whether the Government will be continuing with the project? And if so, what is the current timeline for the project and what are the resources available to support it?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you. The Ministry will be utilising information gat hered from the studies to explore strategies for effec-tive marine spatial planning management. As I said, as far as the timeline is concerned, at this point I can-not confirm a time, as we are still …
Minister. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you. The Ministry will be utilising information gat hered from the studies to explore strategies for effec-tive marine spatial planning management. As I said, as far as the timeline is concerned, at this point I can-not confirm a time, as we are still reviewing the r eports and coming up with a recommendation. But I can assure the Shadow Minister that it is a priority under my watch. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMP Rabain, anything further?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay. Thank you. The Honourable W. L. Furbert, I think you said you have received a question? Yes. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, yes. You can drop that question.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you very much. You have received the answer to the question? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. So you drop it off of this Order Paper, yes. Thank you. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 29, MP Zane De Silva. You have the floor. 482 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank …
Yes. So you drop it off of this Order Paper, yes. Thank you. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 29, MP Zane De Silva. You have the floor. 482 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to defer those, please, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou defer? Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank you very much.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay. The Chair will now recognise MP D. P. Lister. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Likewise, Mr. Speaker, I am deferring those as well.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay. R. W. Scott to Ms. Foggo is deferr ed. MP Weeks.
Mr. Michael A. WeeksMr. Speaker, I received the answers, but I still would like to have these deferred till next week till we get to the Ministerial Statement.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSo you are deferring the question?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOral responses, okay. We now move to the Ministerial Statements. And the first is by the Premier with reference to Brexit. The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 17, MP Walton Brown. QUESTION 1: BREXIT UPDATE: REPORT ON JOINT MINISTERIAL COUNCIL —EXIT NEGOTI ATIONS
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, on page 2 of the Premier’s Statement, he states that the JMC European negoti ation team would ensure that the territories’ position is adopted throughout negotiations. In the same sen-tence, he said the territories’ position, including from a UK perspective, will be adopted. So, …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, on page 2 of the Premier’s Statement, he states that the JMC European negoti ation team would ensure that the territories’ position is adopted throughout negotiations. In the same sen-tence, he said the territories’ position, including from a UK perspective, will be adopted. So, I just need clarity on what this means. Because the territories’ position may or may not be similar to the UK’s position on the issues, yet the Statement says, “including from a UK perspective.” I do not understand how you get a UK perspective on the Overseas Territories position. (It is on page 2, last paragraph.) Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have seen the part of the Statement where it refers to that. That simply means that, from the start of this process when myself and the Cabinet Secretary went to visit the Junior Minister responsible, Robin Walker, in Number 9 Downing Street (I think it was in the summertime of last year), the UK was committed to ensuring that the views and the positions of the territ ories were held very firmly so they could move forward together. But obviously, when you are having these discussions in regards to triggering the article, and negotiations to what would take place after, both par-ties at the table need to have an understanding of each other’s position going forward. So that is what it refers to—an open dialogue so they understand fully our concerns, and we understand what their agenda or push will be going forward.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMP Brown, do you have a supplementary?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. QUESTION 2 : BREXIT UPDATE: REPORT ON JOINT MINISTERIAL COUNCIL —EXIT NEGOTI ATIONS
Mr. Walton BrownOn page 3, in the second par agraph on page 3, the Premier states that he personal-ly “emphasised that the UK Territories can contribute to a truly global Britain.” Now, in light of recent dis agreements that the Overseas Territories, Bermuda and particularly the Finance Minister have had with regard …
On page 3, in the second par agraph on page 3, the Premier states that he personal-ly “emphasised that the UK Territories can contribute to a truly global Britain.” Now, in light of recent dis agreements that the Overseas Territories, Bermuda and particularly the Finance Minister have had with regard to the UK, how do we undertake to assist the UK in asserting its truly global position, which may very well und ermine our very existence?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPremier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: I appreciate the Honour able Member’s question, very clever question indeed.
Mr. Walton BrownElucidation. [Laughter] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Yes, I take that comment across the floor. In the context of the meaning of that part of the paragraph is significant because if you look at the territories, they come from a pretty wide range throughout the globe. And if the UK has …
Elucidation. [Laughter] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Yes, I take that comment across the floor. In the context of the meaning of that part of the paragraph is significant because if you look at the territories, they come from a pretty wide range throughout the globe. And if the UK has the best i nterest of all those territories in place, then that stat ement will be borne to be the truth, that they will have a good global footprint of moving forward and progres sing in the best interests of all the people whom they represent.
Mr. Walton BrownMy third and final question. Bermuda House of Assembly The Speaker: Yes. QUESTION 3 : BREXIT UPDATE: REPORT ON JOINT MINISTERIAL COUNCIL —EXIT NEGOTI ATIONS
Mr. Walton BrownOn the second- to-last page, the Premier states that the Overseas Territories, or the colonies, are united in their advocacy for the retent ion of their free movement in the European Union. But given that the very Brexit vote was about leaving the European Union precisely because the UK did …
On the second- to-last page, the Premier states that the Overseas Territories, or the colonies, are united in their advocacy for the retent ion of their free movement in the European Union. But given that the very Brexit vote was about leaving the European Union precisely because the UK did not want free movement of the EU nationals in its own territory, how likely and how realistic is it to t ry to o btain this as a result of the negotiations?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPremier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Well, Mr. Speaker, that is going to be one of the real interesting parts of discussion. And specifically, free movement can be, I guess, in my opinion, looked at in two aspects. The Honour able Member might have a supportive perspective or a different perspective. …
Premier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Well, Mr. Speaker, that is going to be one of the real interesting parts of discussion. And specifically, free movement can be, I guess, in my opinion, looked at in two aspects. The Honour able Member might have a supportive perspective or a different perspective. Free movement can be free movement to go throughout the area on business or pleasure. And free movement could be extended, to some extent, to look at the right of abode and living in that area. Bermudians, I believe, want very strongly to be able to have the free movement of travel and the opportunity to do business as appropriate within that area.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. The Chair will recognise the Honourable Leader of the Opposition. QUESTION 1 : BREXIT UPDATE: REPORT ON JOINT MINISTERIAL COUNCIL —EXIT NEGOTI ATIONS Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, a question to the Premier on his Statement.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. E. David Burt: Clearly, the Government is f ocused on the UK and Europe and ensuring that Bermuda is protected on that front. Is the Government paying equal attention to the events that are taking place in Washington, DC, and are they using the Washington, DC, Office to …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPremier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Yes, Mr. Speaker. One of the real opportunities and challenges of this position, and being in the Government, is that you have to pay attention to all issues that are in play. And certainly, we are very keen to pay attention to watch what is …
Premier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Yes, Mr. Speaker. One of the real opportunities and challenges of this position, and being in the Government, is that you have to pay attention to all issues that are in play. And certainly, we are very keen to pay attention to watch what is taking place with the new administration in the US. And we have had a number of discussions with our partners in the industry here to ensure that we deal with those challenges there. There has been a great deal of concern in certain sectors of the community about some of the administrative changes that the new President might enact, and we are working closely with all our partners to make sure that we meet those, to deal with those. In regards to the London Office . . .
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Sorry. No, I have started with the London Office. Let me finish the answer for you. The London Office has served a great purpose over there. I have been very impressed with the staff in that office and the work they do. The DC O ffice, to a lesser capacity, we have enough resources in people whom we use, and contacts we have in that industry have an ease of travel there, that the DC Office has been closed down, as was alluded to in the Budget [Debate] last time, I believe.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Premier. Yes, you have a supplementary, Honourable Member? Mr. Rolfe Commissiong: No, I have a question.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou did not come t o me to inform me that you had a question. But I will allow your question.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI will let you ask one question. QUESTION 1 : BREXIT UPDATE: REPORT ON JOINT MINISTERIAL COUNCIL —EXIT NEGOTI ATIONS
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongMr. Speaker, I just wanted to ask the Premier, has there been any thought in event of a hard Brexit to harnessing the office, our London Office, and other relevant government bodies to convey to members or companies within the Lo ndon-based insurance sector that Bermuda is open for business, …
Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to ask the Premier, has there been any thought in event of a hard Brexit to harnessing the office, our London Office, and other relevant government bodies to convey to members or companies within the Lo ndon-based insurance sector that Bermuda is open for business, and that with the ascension of Solvenc y II equivalency, Bermuda can be viewed as an option for 484 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly those companies who want to have continued access to the EU market?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPremier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Yes. I thank the Honour able Member for the question. I appreciate your allo wing th e Honourable Member to ask that good question, Mr. Speaker. Just about every visit that we have to the UK, we continue to meet up with business partners and …
Premier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Yes. I thank the Honour able Member for the question. I appreciate your allo wing th e Honourable Member to ask that good question, Mr. Speaker. Just about every visit that we have to the UK, we continue to meet up with business partners and potential business partners to show the opportunities that we have in Bermuda. So even before the events of the referendum and Brexit, we were constantly tal king about Bermuda, meeting with industry leaders in that area. And it has not changed. We have actually continued to do that since Brexit, and we have worked hard with agencies who have specific responsibility in that area, such as BDA. Since the time I have become Premier, and I know former Premier Cannonier as well, we take the opportunity to host lunches or break-fasts or just meet with people when we are over there. And I think it has been very beneficial, because there are opportunities here, and Bermuda is looked at as a very good jurisdiction.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Premier. Yes, the Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 29, with a supplementary? SUPPLEMENTARY Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Premier, it was good to hear you compliment the London and Washington Offices. Certainly, when most of your Members were on …
All right. Thank you, Premier. Yes, the Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 29, with a supplementary?
SUPPLEMENTARY
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Premier, it was good to hear you compliment the London and Washington Offices. Certainly, when most of your Members were on this side, you criticised the PLP constantly for those two. Wi ll you now admit that those are very good assets, and indeed do well for the country of Bermuda?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPremier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the Honourable Member did not hear my reply to the answer. I certainly did compliment the London Office. I have grown to see first -hand the value of the work they do, not only when you are there on a visit, but …
Premier.
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the Honourable Member did not hear my reply to the answer. I certainly did compliment the London Office. I have grown to see first -hand the value of the work they do, not only when you are there on a visit, but every day of the week. There is a lot of Bermudian interest over there. But the Washington, DC, Office, we have taken a close look at it, and we believe we would be better served to use our resources in other areas, as I believe I covered during the Budget D ebate eleven and a half months ago.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Premier. We now go to the second Statement, on the Census. MP Walton Brown, your question.
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoI just want to remind you of the request, and you did say, yes, that we can deal with the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination . . . next.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, fine. We are going to. Take your time. [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI have not moved. I have said nothing in regards to . . . We now move to, as has been requested, the questions on CEDAW, which is the Statement by the Hono urable Sylvan Richards. And I will recognise first the Learned Member from constituency 34, MP Kim Wilson. …
I have not moved. I have said nothing in regards to . . . We now move to, as has been requested, the questions on CEDAW, which is the Statement by the Hono urable Sylvan Richards. And I will recognise first the Learned Member from constituency 34, MP Kim Wilson.
QUESTION 1: CONVENTION ON THE ELIMIN ATION OF ALL FORMS OF DISCRMINATION AGAINST WOMEN
Ms. Kim N. WilsonThank you, Mr. Speaker. Good afternoon. Mr. Speaker, given the impact CEDAW has and the requirements to end all forms of discrimina-tion, I would ask the Minister to confirm what steps the Government has taken to introduce pay equity legisl ation, bearing in mind that the statistics show that women …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Good afternoon. Mr. Speaker, given the impact CEDAW has and the requirements to end all forms of discrimina-tion, I would ask the Minister to confirm what steps the Government has taken to introduce pay equity legisl ation, bearing in mind that the statistics show that women do earn less than men, notwithstanding the fact that they are more educated than men.
[Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I do believe a parliamentary committee has been empanelled, headed by MP Wilson, that is looking into that very situation. And we are waiting for them to report.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMP Wilson, yes. SUPPLEMENTARY
Ms. Kim N. WilsonYes. I wish that, notwithstanding what report the parliamentary committee may come up with, we are not the Government. So we do not have any legislative power to pass legislation, very rarely. So again, my question would be, What steps is Bermuda House of Assembly the Government taking to address …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think it is prudent that if there is a committee set up to look into this issue, we should wait to get their recommendations before we take any action. That is why the committee was empanelled in …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. thank you, Mini ster. Yes, MP Wilson. Supplementary?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as I stated in the Statement, CEDAW is a living document. And as part of our agreeing to be extending the convention is that the Government will look at areas where there is room for improvement and, over …
Minister.
Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as I stated in the Statement, CEDAW is a living document. And as part of our agreeing to be extending the convention is that the Government will look at areas where there is room for improvement and, over a period of time, work towards improving those deficiencies. So it is something that we will look at. And it will be ongoing.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Yes, MP Wilson, a supplementary?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. QUESTION 3: CONVENTION ON THE ELIMIN ATION OF ALL FORMS OF DISCRMINATION AGAINST WOMEN
Ms. Kim N. WilsonMr. Speaker, given again that CEDAW indicates that the age of majority is 18, whereas in Bermuda our legislation provides for the age of majority being 16, as well as the honest belief defence with respect to offences of unlawful carnal knowledge, I would ask the Honourable Minister, what position …
Mr. Speaker, given again that CEDAW indicates that the age of majority is 18, whereas in Bermuda our legislation provides for the age of majority being 16, as well as the honest belief defence with respect to offences of unlawful carnal knowledge, I would ask the Honourable Minister, what position will the Government take with respect to the defence when it places a burden on the victim, oftentimes who is a woman, with respect to sexual of fences and crimes concerning unlawful carnal knowledge, when CEDAW Convention indicates that the age of majority is 18, whereas the Bermuda legislation ind icates that it is 16?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Once again, that is a deficiency that the Go vernment has recognised and is cognisant of. And it is something that, over a period of time, we will look at with the hope to remedy because it is a deficiency …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you, Minister. The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 16, MP Michael Weeks. QUESTION 1: CONVENTION ON THE ELIMIN ATION OF ALL FORMS OF DISCRMINATION AGAINST WOMEN
Mr. Michael A. WeeksThank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister clarify for the Honourable House what are the first and second res-ervations of the UK Government? Actually, there are actually more than two reservations. Can you clarify all the reservations concerning CEDAW?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the first reservation basically refers to the Government’s position that conscription, although we are not doing it currently, is still on the books. And as it is well known, in Bermuda only males can be conscripted. So the …
Minister. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the first reservation basically refers to the Government’s position that conscription, although we are not doing it currently, is still on the books. And as it is well known, in Bermuda only males can be conscripted. So the reservation that we have put forward is that we continue with that so that in actuality it is discriminating against women, females, because they cannot be conscripted. That is the first one. The second reservation pertains, basically, to Bermudian men who are married to non- Bermudian women. The non- Bermudian wives of Bermudian men are looked on more favourably in the eyes of the law than the non- Bermudian husbands of Bermudian women. So those are the two reservations that Ber-muda has taken. With the second one, that is som ething that Government is going to look at because in this day and age, why is there a discrimination between the non- Bermudian wife of a Bermudian man versus the non- Bermudian husband of a Bermudian woman?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. 486 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly You have a supplementary?
Ms. Kim N. WilsonCould the Honourable Minister indicate what are the UK reservations to CEDAW that he indicated in his Statement at page 4, which now will be extended to Bermuda? The UK reservations to CEDAW, not the Bermuda ones.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Sylvan D. R ichards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, there are a number of reservations that the UK had. I do not have those in front of me. There are a number of them. The Attorney General’s Chambers vetted those and basically came to the decision that they were not …
Minister. Hon. Sylvan D. R ichards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, there are a number of reservations that the UK had. I do not have those in front of me. There are a number of them. The Attorney General’s Chambers vetted those and basically came to the decision that they were not going to harm Bermuda in any way. And we agreed to sign on to adopt those UK reservations.
Ms. Kim N. WilsonYes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Honourable Minister commit to provi ding to this Honourable House a list of the said UK reservations that are relating to CEDAW? Thank you. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Yes, Mr. Speaker. That is not an issue.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you. Yes, MP Weeks. Is this a question or a supplementary to your first question?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay. Question number 2. Carry on. QUESTION 2: CONVENTION ON THE ELIMIN ATION OF ALL FORMS OF DISCRMINATION AGAINST WOMEN
Mr. Michael A. WeeksThank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, can the Honourable Minister inform this House and the listening public where Go vernment is now on ending conscription? Because I see you are talking about conscription and so on. And in your platform you pledged to end conscription as soon as you became …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, can the Honourable Minister inform this House and the listening public where Go vernment is now on ending conscription? Because I see you are talking about conscription and so on. And in your platform you pledged to end conscription as soon as you became Government. Where are you on ending conscription?
[Crosstalk] The Speaker: Minister. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, right now, as is well known and publicly known, the Reg iment is made up of 100 per cent volunteers. And it will continue in that way as long as we have people who are willing to volunteer and serve in the Bermuda Regiment.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerRight. Thank you. Thank you. MP Foggo, you had a question.
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoYes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am going to defer those questions.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou cannot defer it, MP. [Inaudible interjections]
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoI have questions on education. I never came to you. Education, for the report that Minister Pat Gordon- Pamplin . . . I came to request a meeting with you, and I guess maybe you must have mistaken that.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay. MP De Silva. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou have a supplementary? Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Supplementary, yes.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. SUPPLEMENTARY Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Minister, with regard to conscription, and your comment referenced the volun-teers, can we look forward to your bringing legislation to this House, or certainly notice to this House, that conscription will be ended soon?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, that is not under my Ministry. I cannot speak to that. The S p eaker: All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mini ster. Thank you very much, Minister. Bermuda House of Assembly We did have . . . [MP] Rabain, you had …
Minister. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, that is not under my Ministry. I cannot speak to that. The S p eaker: All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mini ster. Thank you very much, Minister.
Bermuda House of Assembly We did have . . . [MP] Rabain, you had asked for a question on the NTB [National Training Board] Act. You do not want to ask that?
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainThank you, Mr. Speaker. Referring to page 2 of the Statement the Mi nister read out —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. QUESTION 1: NATIONAL TRAINING BOARD A NNUAL REPORT 2014 TO 2016
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainAnd it stated, “the Job Board remains a valuable tool to assist individuals with their search for suitable employment.” Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Honourable Minister, given a response to a question asked last summer about the Job Board in which the answer was the statistics could not be …
And it stated, “the Job Board remains a valuable tool to assist individuals with their search for suitable employment.” Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Honourable Minister, given a response to a question asked last summer about the Job Board in which the answer was the statistics could not be as-certained as to whether anyone who had registered on the Job Board received a job from Job Board . . . and now with the Statement that the Job Board r emains a valuable tool, can the Minister tell us if that information is now available and we can ascertain that?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I did indicate in the Statement that they have made some enhancements to the Job Board, some technological advancements. And I believe the information that the Honourable Member is asking for is now available.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. QUESTION 2: NATIONAL TRAINING BOARD A NNUAL REPORT 2014 TO 2016
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainThe second question has to do with the Summer Employment Programme. I am not sure if the Honourable Minister is aware, but there is a programme that has started between the two pub-lic high schools and the Bermuda College, known as the Applied Technology Programme. And the aim of this …
The second question has to do with the Summer Employment Programme. I am not sure if the Honourable Minister is aware, but there is a programme that has started between the two pub-lic high schools and the Bermuda College, known as the Applied Technology Programme. And the aim of this programme is to expose high school students, a cohort of high school students from each school, to the technology programmes that exist at the Bermuda College. In relation to the Summer Employment Pr ogramme, which is aimed at only college students, would the Minister be happy to take back to the N ational Training Board that they will look to try and place some of the high school students whom we are looking to expose to the technology field?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: Mr. Speaker, I just want to confirm that his question was, Was I willing to take the recommendation back?, or, Do I have a r esponse to it? I am not sure what the question is.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMP Rabain, can you help the Minister?
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainYes. I just wanted an indic ation from the Minister that she would talk to Workforce Development about the programme, to include these high school students. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Absolutely, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, just in furtherance, if I may , in response to the earlier question, the …
Yes. I just wanted an indic ation from the Minister that she would talk to Workforce Development about the programme, to include these high school students.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Absolutely, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, just in furtherance, if I may , in response to the earlier question, the answer was not just, Yes, it is available . But also, since January of 2016, there were approximately 963 people who had applied to Job Board who actually were placed—963.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Third question? QUESTION 3: NATIONAL TRAINING BOARD A NNUAL REPORT 2014 TO 2016
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainThird question. Although throughout the Statement given by the Minister, it was for the National Training Board Annual Report, and throughout the report it speaks to the National Training Programme, Part 2, but there is no mention of it in the Minister’s Statement. And I was wondering if the Minister …
Third question. Although throughout the Statement given by the Minister, it was for the National Training Board Annual Report, and throughout the report it speaks to the National Training Programme, Part 2, but there is no mention of it in the Minister’s Statement. And I was wondering if the Minister could let us know when Part 2 will be released, or if it will be released.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Part 2 will be released, and I expect it to be had very shortly. It has been delayed more than I would like to have seen. But there were one or two issues that were included that actually committed a Ministry …
Minister.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Part 2 will be released, and I expect it to be had very shortly. It has been delayed more than I would like to have seen. But there were one or two issues that were included that actually committed a Ministry that I had no control over, and I had to make sure that I got the necessary coalescence with that Ministry. So it should be, hopefully, before the end of . . . Certainly, by the end of March it will be in the public domain, and hopefully before.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. 488 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly That is it. Do you want to ask the other question on the exclusive economic zone? QUESTION 1: MONITORING OUR EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainMr. Speaker, my question to the Honourable Minister is, Since the study was paid for by persons outside of the Ministry’s remit, does the Ministry own the data of the study? Or are they just allowed to view them?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Are you awake, Minister? Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Of course I am awake, Mr. Speaker. [Laughter] Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: The Government does own the data. They were a gift to the Ministry by the Aurum Fund and its principals.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. QUESTION 2: MONITORING OUR EXCLUS IVE ECONOMIC ZONE
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainThe second question: Will the report be made public? Will the report be tabled in this House or made public? Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: I will be happy to table the report in the House.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. QUESTION 3: MONITORING OUR EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainWith the date of the increased activity noted to be between May and N ovember, which is a whole seven months —
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberNovember and May.
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainNovember and May. Will the Minister give us a time frame for when the Marine R esources Enforcement Strategy will finish their deli b-erations and present a report? And will it be done before November of this year?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMinister. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you. You can appr eciate that we just received this report in January. And in regard to having it before November, we will make every effort to ensure that the report of recommenda-tions is made before November.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Members, that brings to a close the Question Period. CONGRATULATORY AND/OR OBITUARY SPEECHES
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Chair will recognise the Honour able Premier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, since I did not have the opportunity because of my delayed return to Bermuda yesterday, I want to take this chance in these Honourable Chamber s this morning to congratulate and thank …
The Chair will recognise the Honour able Premier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, since I did not have the opportunity because of my delayed return to Bermuda yesterday, I want to take this chance in these Honourable Chamber s this morning to congratulate and thank Mr. King and all his team at the Loren on the building of a wonderful facility in the East End of the Island that many colleagues in this Chamber had the pleasure to attend for an official opening last night. I did manage to see some of the pictures and speak to some of my colleagues about the facility. And I have been quite impressed with the quality that has been offered there. I have not been on site for a couple of months. But I guess probably about three- quarter s of the way through construction I had the chance to go down there one afternoon with colleagues and walk through the main building block, which I believe is about 40 hotel rooms. And I was impressed by many things at the facility. One, every room had a view that will make you relax and appreciate the getaway to Bermuda. The rooms were of good size, and the amenities seemed to be first class all around. And so I am pleased to see that this new faci lity, the first property for some years to be opened in Bermuda, has now seen it take place. There is still some work to be done, but this, once again, signals that all of the hard work that has taken place is finally seeing some fruition. So, congratulations to Mr. King and his team, and we look forward to working with them to make sure that the place is successful and contributes to the rebirth of Bermuda tourism. And I would like to extend those congratulations, I am sure, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of all Honourable Members of the House, and certainly those who had the chance to be there last night and enjoy the festivities. So thank
Bermuda House of Assembly you very much, and it is nice to see that the conf idence has come back.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Any other Member? The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 4, the Deputy Speaker.
Mrs. Suzann Roberts -HolshouserThank you, Mr. Speaker, and good afternoon. I would stand to my feet to send out an acknowledgement and congratulations to the Cash Back Programme. It was a recipient this time of Pat hways. Pathways, o f course, is a centre that deals with individuals who are troubled by the …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and good afternoon. I would stand to my feet to send out an acknowledgement and congratulations to the Cash Back Programme. It was a recipient this time of Pat hways. Pathways, o f course, is a centre that deals with individuals who are troubled by the plight of drug abuse. And $15,000 will go a long way, Mr. Speaker, I think, to aid their facility and as they continue to work on their programme. Mr. Speaker, often, we come across individ uals either in our families or families of individuals whom we know who are afflicted with the terrible di sease of being addicted to drugs. So, Mr. Speaker, I continue to encourage, and I stood on the floor, I be-lieve, last week (not to reflect on anything) . . . But I mentioned the fact that Cash Back Programme is something that all of us in this House need to reach out for assistance— $15,000, Mr. Speaker, will go a long way, and again, hats off to the Cash Back Pr ogramme. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will recognise the Minister of F inance. Minister of Finance, you have the floor. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like the House to pass condolences to the family of the late Larbi Chentouf, who was formerly …
Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will recognise the Minister of F inance. Minister of Finance, you have the floor.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like the House to pass condolences to the family of the late Larbi Chentouf, who was formerly maître d’ at the Newport Room for many, many, many years at the Southampton Pri ncess. I would like to pass on condolences to his wife Jan, and his son Najib, who, I think many people know, is very active in the Chewstick Foundation. Larbi was originally from Morocco and made Bermuda his home, and was really an important part of our tourism effort for Bermuda over many decades. He also was a terrific tennis player, and I was really surprised to see a guy as fit as he was pass on so early. I would like to send those condolences. And I do not know if anybody has mentioned the passing of Gloria Tuzo. Anybody?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I would like the House to send condolences to the family of the late Mrs. Gloria Tuzo, former wife of Ross Tuzo, whom I think ever ybody knows, and also Livingston Tuzo and Deborah Tuzo, people who are very, very well known in Bermuda. …
No.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I would like the House to send condolences to the family of the late Mrs. Gloria Tuzo, former wife of Ross Tuzo, whom I think ever ybody knows, and also Livingston Tuzo and Deborah Tuzo, people who are very, very well known in Bermuda. I will always have in my mind, Mr. Speaker, the vision of the Tuzos on the dance floor. They were r eally something, really something. So I would like to pass on condolences to those families, please.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Would any other Honourable Members care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 1, MP Bascome. Hon. Kenneth (Kenny) Bascome: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would just like to ask that this Honourable House pass on congrats to Mr. Wayne Smith, pos tman …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPostmaster General? Hon. Kenneth (Kenny) Bascome: Yes. He was r ecently selected to [the position of] Secretary General of the Caribbean Postal Union. And I would just like to ask this Honourable House to acknowledge that young man. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 2, MP Nandi Outerbridge.
Mrs. Nandi OuterbridgeMr. Speaker, I rise this morning to ask that this Honourable House send congratulations to Osagi Bascome, who has recently been signed by Bristol City [Sky Bet Championship Club] football club. And the club seems pretty excited to have Osagi on board. I think it is very humbling and encouraging …
Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to ask that this Honourable House send congratulations to Osagi Bascome, who has recently been signed by Bristol City [Sky Bet Championship Club] football club. And the club seems pretty excited to have Osagi on board. I think it is very humbling and encouraging that every week we come up here, we speak about our young Bermudian athletes. It is en-couraging, and it makes me have faith for our future. So again, I just want to send congratulations to Osagi, and I am sure the whole House would like to be ass ociated with those congrats. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. The Chair will now recognise the Minister of Economic Development, Dr. Gibbons.
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsThank you, Mr. Speaker. I would also like to be associated with the congratulations to Stephen King and his colleagues at the Loren at Pink Beach. I am not sure whether you 490 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly had a chance, Mr. Speaker, to see …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThey did not invite me, Honourable Minister.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI did not get an invitation. [Laughter]
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsI know they had some problems with the invitations because a number of colleagues on this side . . . they apparently were sent and they did not receive them. So I think they were trying to rectify that.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIt is lost in the mail somewhere.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, lost in the ether. [Laughter]
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsBut I would like to be associated with the Premier’s comments. Mr. Speaker, you certainly will know that, going back many years, Pink Beach Cottage Colony was in the forefront of Bermuda tourism for many, many years. It had an extremely loyal following, guests. It was con-sidered to be premier …
But I would like to be associated with the Premier’s comments. Mr. Speaker, you certainly will know that, going back many years, Pink Beach Cottage Colony was in the forefront of Bermuda tourism for many, many years. It had an extremely loyal following, guests. It was con-sidered to be premier property in Bermuda, and I think it did a lot to effectively stabilise and provide a found ation for our Bermuda tourism. It was the Cottage Col-ony ef fect and Cottage Colony approach, of which there were a number of other representatives as well. And it was, I would say, almost a little sad over the years because clearly it started to run down. I think people recognised that. It was, in a way, shabby ch ic would be a nice way of putting it. I live in the area. I grew up in that area, so I had very much a warm spot in my heart for the pro perty. But it is an extraordinary piece of property. And I think, certainly, in Government we are so pleased to see Mr. King come in and take advantage of that property. And from what saw last night, the rooms are actually gorgeous. They are very well appointed, as the Premier said. They have got very large space, and in many respects an extraordinary view of South Shore. It is on about three levels there. There is what he calls the Pink Beach Club down in the lower level and sort of a huge deck. It is going to be a magnificent property when it gets finished. So it is very nice to see someone taking an investment approach in Bermuda and doing a very nice job. I was talking to Gilbert Lopes, who is a general contractor there last night, and he said that Mr. King had announced two years ago that he wanted to open specifically on this date. And he did, in fact, open specifically on this date. And we hear that the soft launch, probably with guests, is in the next week or two. So, anyway, we wish him very well. While I am on my feet, I do not think this gentleman was done. But I would like to pass on condo-lences to the family of the late Peter Cooper, to his wife, Barbara, and children, Somers, Beth Miller, and Tina, and also to [associate] Suzann Roberts - Holshouser, and there may be some others as well. I will do this side of the House unless the other side is interested. But certainly, those of us on this side would like to ask that condolences be sent. Mr. Speaker, you will know that Peter Cooper was a very well -known retailer, A. S. Cooper & Sons. I believe he was managing director of that retail establishment, which again w as at the forefront of Bermuda retail (I hate to admit that) for many, many years. [Laughter]
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsBut also, he was a very, very keen sailor as well. And I think certainly his children have followed him in many respects in that footstep as well. But Cooper still is, obviously, well represented on Front Street, and indeed Reid Street as well. And certainly we pass on condolences …
But also, he was a very, very keen sailor as well. And I think certainly his children have followed him in many respects in that footstep as well. But Cooper still is, obviously, well represented on Front Street, and indeed Reid Street as well. And certainly we pass on condolences for his contributions to tourism and to retail and to the Island and to the sailing community. Thank y ou, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member, Susan Jackson. You have the floor.
Ms. Susan E. JacksonI would just like to send out congratulations to a constituent, Vanessa Schrum. She works at Appleby, and she has just been awar ded Woman of the Year at a ceremony in London. And this was for the Citywealth Powerwomen Awards. Vanessa is a wonderful, very well -rounded individual. I …
I would just like to send out congratulations to a constituent, Vanessa Schrum. She works at Appleby, and she has just been awar ded Woman of the Year at a ceremony in London. And this was for the Citywealth Powerwomen Awards. Vanessa is a wonderful, very well -rounded individual. I certainly have seen her outside of the workplace. She is an active and energetic mother. She is very much involved in sport and encourages the children to get involved in sport as well. And very heart -warming . . . During the recent hurricane, she was very much out in the community with the children, donating and giving away avocados and helping them to set up a really nice stall and attract attention. And many passers -by were stopping by to pick up a bag of avocados.
Bermuda House of Assembly So this is the kind of well -rounded individual that Bermuda applauds. And again, Woman of the Year, very well deserved both professionally, from a community perspective, and as a parent. And I would like to associate Kim Wilson, who also is most proud; Jeanne Atherden. I am seeing Pat Gordon- Pamplin — the entire floor. The entire House is super -proud of you, Vanessa. So, thank you so much, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you very much. Would any other Honourable Members care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Minister for S ocial Development and Sports, Minister Sylvan Ric hards. You have the floor. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to be associated with …
Thank you very much. Would any other Honourable Members care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Minister for S ocial Development and Sports, Minister Sylvan Ric hards. You have the floor.
Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to be associated with the congratulatory remarks to Mr. Stephen King on the opening of his boutique hotel, the Loren, which is in my constituency. So I am very, very happy that this new hotel has opened up. He had a very nice r eception last night. It was full, with a lot of beautiful people. And it is a beautiful facility. There was a young man who gave me a tour of the property before we went downstairs by the pool. And I must say the rooms are well appointed. It is an ultra- modern design, which is kind of unique in Bermuda. But it still has Bermuda touches. They have a carpet going up through the hallway, and it has got a big map of Bermuda going up on the carpet —very nice touches. When we went down by the pool, I felt like I was in Miami or New York or Ibiza. It is a very, very nice facility. It is going to be a very nice addition to Bermuda’s hotel stock. And, you know, Mr. Speaker, I have to give credit to the gentleman, because when I was canvassing before I got elected, I walked up on their property, the Pink Beach property. And it was sad because the property was in disrepair. Clearly, it needed to be renovated or torn down and some new facility put there. And Mr. King felt bullish enough about Bermuda to invest his money in that property. And last night, to be down there and to see the fruits of his labour and the work that was done by Bermudian contractors, it really, really made me feel hopeful about our tourism product and about the f uture for Bermuda in general. And with the hotel in St. George's coming online and, hopefully, Michael Doug-las will get his property online, I think in the next few years we are going to see some very, very interesting and beautiful properties. And the folks at Morgan’s Point . . . there is a renaissance going on in tourism, Mr. Speaker. And this Government, I am going to take credit for it. Also, Mr. Speaker, this week Ben Ainslie racing up at Dockyard . . . Land Rover BAR opened their facility up at Dockyard. And once again, it was very well attended. I was glad to see that there were Members of Parliament from both sides . . . [Missing audio]
Proceedings suspended
Proceedings resumed at 2:08 pm [Mr. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWe are continuing with congratulatory and obituary speeches. And the Chair will recognise the Minister Cannonier. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to ask that the sentiments by some of my colleagues in congratulating the British America’s Cup racing team on the naming of their …
We are continuing with congratulatory and obituary speeches. And the Chair will recognise the Minister Cannonier. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to ask that the sentiments by some of my colleagues in congratulating the British America’s Cup racing team on the naming of their vessel —they named the vessel Rita. I did notice, as was mentioned also, that there were many supporters there. But one part I would like to congratulate—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAssociate yourself because Minister Richards — Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Minister Richards, yes. I was going to say it in another part, but yes. As my colleague, Mini ster Richards, had mentioned, another part that I wanted to congratulate the British America’s Cup team Land Rover [BAR, Ben Ainslie Racing] …
Associate yourself because Minister Richards — Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Minister Richards, yes. I was going to say it in another part, but yes. As my colleague, Mini ster Richards, had mentioned, another part that I wanted to congratulate the British America’s Cup team Land Rover [BAR, Ben Ainslie Racing] for, and that was, while we were up there, we noticed and had seen that there were dozens of Bermudians, local comp anies, who had worked on putting together the base for the local team, the Land Rover [BAR] team, for their commitment to Bermuda and for taking on Bermudians to help them erect such a fine building. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member, MP Jeff Sousa. You have the floor.
Mr. Jeff SousaMr. Speaker, I am very happy to rise this afternoon to ask this Honourable House to send congratulations to two fine young men who are sai lors, Ahzai Smith and Christopher Raymond, who both just came back from competing in New Zealand, where they both won their respective classes. Ahzai …
Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to rise this afternoon to ask this Honourable House to send congratulations to two fine young men who are sai lors, Ahzai Smith and Christopher Raymond, who both just came back from competing in New Zealand, where they both won their respective classes. Ahzai won his Gold Fleet, and Christopher won the Silver Fleet. Both of these young men are only 12 years old, Mr. Speaker. This truly shows that Bermudians can compete anywhere on the world stage. A big thank you must go to the America’s Cup Endeavour Pr o492 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly gramme, who organised this. Both men were chosen because they did very well and attended very well the Bermuda Sailing Nationals. I, along with Minister Sy lvan Richards and Junior Minister Nandi Outerbridge, did greet them out at the airport. And it was quite awesome to talk to these young men and listen to them say that they were aspiring to one day compete in the America’s Cup. And even further, Mr. Speaker, they would love to go on and compete for Bermuda in the Olympics. So this was very inspiring, Mr. Speaker. And certainly, we as Members of the Legislature need to support young people, young men, young women who are doing these positive things around the world, as we have heard others talk about earlier today. And it was great to see the numbers of family and fri ends who were there to support them. So I certainly wish to congratulate those two young men. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable and Learned Member, MP Leah Scott. You have the floor.
Ms. Leah K. ScottMr. Speaker, I would like to ass ociate myself with the condolences for Larbi Chentouf. Larbi is actually my constituent. And I met Larbi in 1986 when I was working at the Southampton Prin-cess in the Conventions Department. He was always the consummate professional and always very kind and generous. …
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ass ociate myself with the condolences for Larbi Chentouf. Larbi is actually my constituent. And I met Larbi in 1986 when I was working at the Southampton Prin-cess in the Conventions Department. He was always the consummate professional and always very kind and generous. And I am very sorry to hear about his death, and I wish my condolences to his fam ily. I would like to also associate myself with the congratulations to Vanessa Lovell Schrum. Vanessa was my mentor when I was at Appleby, and she is also a very good friend. And I am happy to see that she has been granted this award. As my parliamen-tary colleague, Susan Jackson, alluded to, Vanessa is very well liked in the community, very family oriented, and just generally a really nice person.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberGrounded.
Ms. Leah K. ScottYes, very, very grounded. And finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer congratulations to Nathan Trott, who is the son of Pearline Trott and Dwayne Trott, for signing a professional football contract with West Ham United Football Association.
Some Hon. Members Some Hon. MembersWow! Ah! [Desk thumping]
Ms. Leah K. ScottSo I am glad to see our Bermudians progressing and doing well. And I hope that they continue to do so. I would like to associate Minister Simons with that congratulations; also, Jamahl Simmons. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you, H onourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 14, MP Glen Smith.
Mr. Glen SmithThank you, Mr. Speaker, and good afternoon.
Mr. Glen SmithI would like the Honourable House to send condolences to the family of Mr. Ian Mackie. Mr. Mackie had indomitable spirit and had water and di ving in his blood. Mr. Mackie worked with his father, Doug Mackie, who had Mackie Marine for many years. He also used to work …
I would like the Honourable House to send condolences to the family of Mr. Ian Mackie. Mr. Mackie had indomitable spirit and had water and di ving in his blood. Mr. Mackie worked with his father, Doug Mackie, who had Mackie Marine for many years. He also used to work for me at IBC many moons ago. And recently, he worked for Mr. and Mrs. Michael Douglas as their property manager. Mr. Mackie is survived by his wife, Aracely, and daughter, Cecilia. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will recognise the Honourable Mi nister. Yes, Minister Patricia Gordon- Pamplin. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as I associate myself with the congratulations of my honourable colleagues concer ning the opening of the headquarters for Land …
All right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will recognise the Honourable Mi nister. Yes, Minister Patricia Gordon- Pamplin. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as I associate myself with the congratulations of my honourable colleagues concer ning the opening of the headquarters for Land Rover BAR, I would like to specifically highlight, Mr. Speaker, the exploration zone that they have produced for the benefit of our students. Mr. Speaker, what is interes ting is that with the America’s Cup programme, the teams who have come to Bermuda are attempting to leave some kind of legacy once they depart from our shores. And specifically for Land Rover BAR, the ex-ploration zone highlights the legacy that they would like to leave. Mr. Speaker, they will enter into a Lionfish Management Programme, which is going to be utili sing the robotics in order to be able to help to contain the lionfish population. And that is something that they want to offer Bermuda. In addition, Mr. Speaker, they have a Healthy Oceans Programme, in which they are showi ng how plastics can be recycled, reused for the benefit of the planet. And in trying to keep these things out of the ocean, they spoke to . . . They have exhibits up where children can go and interactively show and have an appreciation for how this recycling
Bermuda House of Assembly programme can help to assist us in terms of how many plastics, how many pounds of plastics, tons of plastics they actually recover from the ocean. And what it does negatively as far as the fish, flora and fauna of the ocean are concerned. The other thing that they are hoping to do and that I wish to specifically make mention of is that they, as part of their legacy, through Land Rover BAR, are donating some photovoltaic solar panels, which will be housed on the roof of the Bermuda National Museum. Mr. Speaker, I think that when we look at these types of endeavours or these types of initiatives, along with the Endeavour Programme that Team Oracle has put in place for our young people, in teaching them how to sail and in teaching them how to interact, the STEM programme within their learning, I think it bodes well and I think we owe a debt of gratitude to the teams who have taken the opportunity to leave a legacy for Bermuda and for our young people. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you very much, Mi nister. The Chair will now recognise Minister Atherden. Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise to be associated with the remarks of condolences to be sent to the family of Peter Cooper. Years ago when I was just …
Thank you. Thank you very much, Mi nister. The Chair will now recognise Minister Atherden. Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise to be associated with the remarks of condolences to be sent to the family of Peter Cooper. Years ago when I was just what I call not a budding accountant, but I was at least an ac-counting manager, I remember coming into contact with Peter, because at that point in time there were some businesses in Bermuda that needed to compile some information about the sales, et cetera, that they were doing so the government could be provided with some information. And as you can appreciate, sometimes bus inesses want to keep their competitive edge and not let other people know how well they were doing. So these businesses wanted someone whom they could send their information to who could compile it for them, but someone whom they believed that they could trust in to do the job. And so, I was very much . . . I felt really glad that they would feel confidence in me to not only get this information, but to also provide some guidance in terms of what they were trying to do. After that, Peter and I, every time I saw him and we had discussions about their businesses and what was going on, it made me realise how much in-terest he had in Bermuda and how much interest he had in the businesses and making sure that they were successful. So, I was saddened to hear of his passing. And every time I went to Cooper & Sons and I would see his son, Somers, I would remark and find out how he was doing. And therefore, I was saddened to hear that he died. And on the note of sadness, I would also like to have condolences sent to the family of the late Dicky King. Dicky was a young man who died—I shall not say died suddenly , because he was taken ill. And he left Bermuda and actually died abroad. But Dicky was one of those young persons who . . . I do not know how many of you might remember. But years ago when you had Archie Brown, there was a young man there who was always up there. Whenever you came in, he would be trying to sell you something and would always go out and try and make sure that you never left the premises unhappy. So much so that when he left Archie Brown, he actually started a shop called the Highlander Shop because he could interact with anybody. And customers would come in and be very much wanting to buy Bermuda’s things. Dicky was one of those individuals who loved people. And he would spend lots of his time down at Swizzle Inn. They used to start to call him the King of Swizzle Inn. But he was an individual who, tourists would come in there and he would talk about Berm uda. He would talk about any type of sport. He never played golf, although he was the manager of Riddell’s Bay Golf Club for a while. But he loved golf. He loved to talk about golf. And he loved to bet. So, lots of persons were very saddened because he had an enga ging personality. At his home- going service, I looked at the range of individuals who were there, and I realised that he had touched many lives. So, Mr. Speaker, I would like condolences to be sent to his family.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Minister, the Minister Cole Simons. You have the floor. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise to send congratulatory r emarks and associate myself with the remarks already made in regards …
All right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Minister, the Minister Cole Simons. You have the floor.
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise to send congratulatory r emarks and associate myself with the remarks already made in regards to the Loren Hotel; condolences to Gloria Tuzo and Peter Cooper. Peter Cooper I knew really well, and his kids. This man was a people per-son, a true people person. He was disarming. When you were in his presence, you felt you could say an ything to him, and he would listen and he was present. He was a legend of his time as far as dealing with people, in particular young people, and listening to them. I would like to also associate myself with the comments made for Vanessa Schrum. Ms. Schrum not only won an award recently, but in 2012 her inter-national legal team at Appleby won the STEP Private Client Award for international law teams. And that is a large recognition. She was recognised in England, in London, for all STEP members around the world. So this is not the first time that she has been honoured for her professional contribution, and it just shows that 494 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Bermuda has world- class practitioners here and that these practitioners are also Bermudians. I would like to also recognise another young person. Her name is Candace Furbert. Ms. Furbert recently joined the ensemble of Dreamgirls at the London Savoy Theatre. Again, we have young people in the arts who are doing extremely well. And whe never possible, I will acknowledge their contributions on the global stage. So, to Candace and her future in the arts, I wish her all the very best. Mr. Speaker, I would like to also send condolences to the family of Kenneth Wolffe. He was a man of all seasons. He was a jack of all trades. He was a well-known barber, and he was a community activist in that he got involved with young people. In addition, he would go around to seniors’ homes and hospitals to provide barber services free of charge for those who could least afford it. He played soccer for the Devonshire Lions and the Dock Hill Rangers. He was a man, as I said, of all seasons. He loved to swim; he loved to dive off of Devonshire’s dock in Pigeon Hole. He will be sadly missed by his family. I would like to also send congratulations to Theresa Harney -Zuill. She wins the Hotelier of the Year. She is the Manager at the Royal Palms Hotel. She has been in the industry for the past 25 years, and she has been respected. She worked at Elbow Beach for 20 years. And she has built up a following and a great reputation as a world- class hotelier. So again, all the very best to her in achieving Hotelier of the Year.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. Would any other Honourable Member care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 16. MP Weeks.
Mr. Michael A. WeeksI would like to associate m yself with the remarks for Mr. Nathan Trott, who just signed a contract at West Ham United. For those who do not know, West Ham was my team, so Nathan most definitely has a good future. Out there among the Hammers. He will be …
Mr. Michael A. WeeksYes. I would also like to associate myself, Mr. Speaker, with the remarks for young Osagi Bascome, who signed a contract for Bristol City. Mr. Bascome, as many of you know, comes from a sporting family. His father, Herbie Bas-come, the former Cup Match skipper, his brother Oronde, another former …
Yes. I would also like to associate myself, Mr. Speaker, with the remarks for young Osagi Bascome, who signed a contract for Bristol City. Mr. Bascome, as many of you know, comes from a sporting family. His father, Herbie Bas-come, the former Cup Match skipper, his brother Oronde, another former Cup Match skipper. And he has got another brother, I think Okera, who is on the cusp of playing professional cricket. So, hats off to Osagi Bascome and his endeavour with Bristol City. I would like to associate the whole House with those remarks, Mr. Speaker, especially the Tourism Minister Bascome. But, Mr. Speaker, on a sombre note, I would like to send condolences to the family of Mr. Ra’Shun Trott. And I will associate the whole House with this, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Ra’Shun Trott was one of my co nstituents, a 34- year-old young man, a father, a son to Gina and [Horace] Trott. He was on the job, I think Wednesday, and he had an unfortunate accident. He was electrocuted on the job. There is not much more I could say other than going to see his family and what-not, and trying to show as much support as possible. But this young man was actually doing what good f athers do— out there working to put food on the table. And an unfortunate accident, he was electrocuted in an unfortunate work incident. So my heart goes out to him and his family. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 33, MP Simmons.
Mr. Jamahl S. SimmonsThank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today on a sad note to note and honour a Sandy’s resident of some stature, Ms. Marilyn Si mmons. Ms. Marilyn Simmons was a stalwart in the Bermuda Progressive Labour Party in the Sandys branch and was among many of the people who worked …
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberMarilyn died?
Mr. Jamahl S. SimmonsYes, Marilyn Elaine [nee] Jones. She passed the other day. And she was one of the people with a backbone of sand, and one of the people who helped to do the work behind the scenes to get things done. We extend our condolences to the family and to all …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. Would any other Honourable Member care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Attorney General. Honourable and Learned Attorney General, you have the floor. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to send condolences to the family of Robert Smith, who died …
Thank you, Honourable Member. Would any other Honourable Member care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Attorney General. Honourable and Learned Attorney General, you have the floor.
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to send condolences to the family of Robert Smith, who died recently. He lived at Morer Hall at Morer Estate at Smith’s Parish, neighbours of mine, a real Smith’s Parish family. He was in his 68 th year, had suffered from health challenges for some
Bermuda House of Assembly period of time, and his wife, Joy Smith, had predeceased him. He leaves behind his children, Robert Jr. and Crista. So I fondly remember the family in my days growing up, of course, at what is now . . . Morer Estate was open farmland in those days, with cows on it.
[Inaudible interjections]
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: I remember running around, discovering down there all the oleander trees and c edar trees and, of course, the poison ivy. But those were joyous days. And, of course, Bermuda and particularly Smith’s was a much more rural space at that time than it is now, although it is an area where fam ilies stay where they were. And this family has been in that location for generations. In addition to that, I would like to associate myself with the congratulations given to Vanessa Schrum, who heads the Private Client and Trust Division of Appleby’s law firm, who was honoured by Cit iwealth with her award as a professional woman. That shows great —reflects well on Bermuda and our international legal firms. In addition to that, I had the honour to attend two celebrations. One was the Land Rover BAR cel ebration, which I think, Mr. Speaker, you yourself also attended and many Members of this Chamber. That was a wonderful occasion. It was my first chance to meet Sir Ben Ainslie and his wife, Georgie, and some of their technical people. It was a great joy to see how progress is being made up there in an incredible fas hion. It was a joy to see them christen their new racing boat, although I do not know whether it was good luck or not, but they had difficulty breaking the champagne bottle. That took several attempts to get that bottle broken, but it eventually was done. And hopefully, that will be good luck rather than bad luck. The vessel was named Rita, which I have not discovered the secret of whether it was from the Beatles song about Rita the metre maid or whether it was some other reason behind it. But we wish them the best of luck. But as the Minister who sits next to me said, one of their goals is to bring the cup home to Portsmouth, to England, somehow we are not wishing too hard for them to be the overall winner at the end of the day. I think there are other teams who are more likely to stay here if they are fortunate enough to win that cup. And last, but not least, I would like to assoc iate myself with the congratulations to Mr. Stephen King and his crew, in particular the general contractor, Gilbert Lopes, for the fine work that they have done at the old Pink Beach to create the Loren at Pink Beach, which is a wonderful new part of Bermuda’s tourism product. It is an up- market piece of that product. It is a boutique hotel. Certainly, you could not get much closer to the ocean in Smith’s Parish. And as many Members have noted, the re is a long history there, certainly going back to the days of “Toppy” Cowen and Mr. Gibbons and Mr. Williams, who was there, who ran it before. It has had a long line of Bermudians who have been involved with that property, and we hope that it can continue into the future. It was an i ncredible occasion, with hundreds and hundreds of guests. I think everyone was very appreciative of the hard work and the dedication that Mr. King has put into creating that property to add to our tourism prod-uct, and we hope that that is one of several new hotels which will be being created in Bermuda. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Thank you, Honourable Member. Would any other Honourable Member care to speak? There are no other Members. MATTER OF PRIVILEGE MOTION
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWe now move to Matters of Privilege. And the Chair will recognise the Learned Member from constituency 36. MP Michael Scott, you have the floor. Hon. Michael J. Scott: I am very grateful, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this motion of privilege cites the Member for Devonshire East for breach of …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIf you could first read the motion. FINANCE MINISTER’S FAILURE TO DISCLOSE INFORMATION ON AIRPORT AUTHORITY BILL 2017 AND AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCE SSIONS ACT 2017 Hon. Michael J. Scott: And the motion on our Order Paper this afternoon is the motion in my name on a Matter of Privilege under …
If you could first read the motion.
FINANCE MINISTER’S FAILURE TO DISCLOSE INFORMATION ON AIRPORT AUTHORITY BILL 2017 AND AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCE SSIONS ACT 2017 Hon. Michael J. Scott: And the motion on our Order Paper this afternoon is the motion in my name on a Matter of Privilege under the Standing Order 13. It reads as follows: WHEREAS the Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2016 and the Airport Development Concessions Act 2016 having received their First Readings and are scheduled for Second Reading and debate this 10 th day of February 2017; AND WHEREAS the Minister of Finance, the Hon. E. T. Richards, JP, MP, has failed to disclose or include, with the recently disclosed Project Agreement, the financial models and accurate financial pr ojections to Members of this House, nor has he di sclosed the Lease . . . (I amend the motion in this r egard because of the changes; we now know that that is a pending.) Has not disclosed the financial models and accurate financial projections relative to the Air-port Development Agreement, further the said Minister of Finance seeks to debate the Airport Authority Bill before us without disclosing to Members of the House 496 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly the said financial information related to the Airport Project Agreement, so as, Mr. Speaker, to inform and/or put the Members of the House in a position to know what they are and we are approving; AND WHEREAS there is significant public disquiet in the Bermuda community related directly to growing objection to the Government’s and Ministers’ continuing to proceed with the Airport Project in the circumstances of material nondisclosure; AND WHEREAS, pursuant to Standing Order 13, the Shadow Attorney General has duly given to the Speaker of the House a written Statement of Points of Complaint on a Question of Privilege, contained in a letter dated the 30 th of November 2016 and a further letter dated February the 9th, 2017; BE IT RESOLVED that this House do come to a decision on the complaint as alleged against the said Minister of Finance, and thereafter, following due consideration, either defer all debate on the Bills until disclosure and provision of the said underlying financial models of the Project Agreement in every material particular to Members of the House and commit the said complaint to the Privileges Committee.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerRight. Honourable Member, just before you go on, let me just remind Members or inform Members of the procedure to be followed. The Honourable and Learned Member has just given the motion and will have 20 minutes to speak. And then, the Member who is impugned, the Honourable Finance Minister, …
Right. Honourable Member, just before you go on, let me just remind Members or inform Members of the procedure to be followed. The Honourable and Learned Member has just given the motion and will have 20 minutes to speak. And then, the Member who is impugned, the Honourable Finance Minister, will have 20 minutes to speak. Once those two speeches are over, then, as the Honourable Member is asking, it be resolved that the House come to a decision on the complaint. So, at that point, after the Members have completed their presentations, we will then decide whether the alleged complaint is agreed upon or it is not agreed upon. If it is agreed upon, then the last part comes into play in terms of the deferring of the debate, et cetera. And if it is not successful, then it will fall away. Yes.
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: If I may, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Honourable Member. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: I have a couple of questions to ask with respect to this. On this side of the House, I have been appointed to address the matter because on this side of the House it is not viewed as a personal matter with respect …
Yes, Honourable Member. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: I have a couple of questions to ask with respect to this. On this side of the House, I have been appointed to address the matter because on this side of the House it is not viewed as a personal matter with respect to the Honourable Member who speaks for Finance, the Minister of Finance, but viewed as a matter against the Government as a whole.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, I beg to differ there. The motion is against the Honourable Minister. That is what the motion is. And so, the Honourable Minister will have to stand and make the presentation. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Well, with all due respect, Mr. Speaker, this takes us all completely by …
Honourable Member, I beg to differ there. The motion is against the Honourable Minister. That is what the motion is. And so, the Honourable Minister will have to stand and make the presentation. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Well, with all due respect, Mr. Speaker, this takes us all completely by surprise be-cause you said you wanted to confirm the way you were going to deal with this, but it has never been di scussed with us at all. So—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Yes.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMy decision is that the motion is done, and you received the motion last night under some circumstances. Privilege Motions can come one hour to me on the day. So you have had it. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Well, Mr. Speaker, there are several difficulties there. One, of course, is …
My decision is that the motion is done, and you received the motion last night under some circumstances. Privilege Motions can come one hour to me on the day. So you have had it.
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Well, Mr. Speaker, there are several difficulties there. One, of course, is that the motion itself refers to several things that we do not have in our possession. The Honourable Member —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWell, Honourable Member, let me just say this. The Honourable Member will have an opportunity to speak on that. The Honourable Member, at the time that he makes his presentation, will be able to speak on that. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Well, what I wanted to speak to you about …
Well, Honourable Member, let me just say this. The Honourable Member will have an opportunity to speak on that. The Honourable Member, at the time that he makes his presentation, will be able to speak on that. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Well, what I wanted to speak to you about . . . I know you want to get on with it, Mr. Speaker. I am not here to irritate you, but —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo. You are not irritating me. You are making your point. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: The position that we take on this side is that this is not probably a matter of priv ilege. It is not a matter of privilege. So if I can address you on that . …
No. You are not irritating me. You are making your point.
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: The position that we take on this side is that this is not probably a matter of priv ilege. It is not a matter of privilege. So if I can address you on that . . . I do not want to . . . this is obviously — [Crosstalk]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWell, Honourable Member, let me just say this. This matter has come before me, and I have taken it as a matter of privilege. That is the Speaker’s decision. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Okay. Our difficulty, Mr. Speaker, is normally you would hear both sides before you rule. You have …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNot on a matter of privilege, Honour able Member. The privileged matter comes . . . As I was saying, just so that you know, that this matter could have come to me while I am sitting here in the House, one hour ago. I would not even have had …
Not on a matter of privilege, Honour able Member. The privileged matter comes . . . As I was saying, just so that you know, that this matter could have come to me while I am sitting here in the House, one hour ago. I would not even have had the chance to see it. And it does not have to come except for an hour, according to our [Standing Orders]. So this has come yesterday. I have asked that it be sent
Bermuda House of Assembly to the Member who was impugned. And so, you will have the opportunity to speak. And at that point we will . . . So one more point you might make.
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Well, it appears that I will not have the opportunity to speak.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWell, no. The only people who will speak are the man impugned and the person who is . . . Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: But that is the difficulty. I take the view that this goes back to November. You say you only heard of it yesterday, but they are …
Well, no. The only people who will speak are the man impugned and the person who is . . .
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: But that is the difficulty. I take the view that this goes back to November. You say you only heard of it yesterday, but they are referring to a letter from November, which is some three months ago. So it is a little bit difficult for us. We have not seen it. We do not view it, properly, as a matter of privilege. We would like to be able to—
[Crosstalk]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThat can be recorded, Honourable Member. It can be recorded in the Minutes. [Crosstalk]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerBut I thank you very much for your presentation. I do appreciate your point. But I have made a decision, and we will move forward. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: I am obliged.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAnd it will be recorded as . . . Your di sapproval will be certainly recorded. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: I am obliged, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. So the Chair will recognise now the Learned Member from constituency 36. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To Members of the House: So we begin this privilege motion, which is about the privileges of the House. It could not be more important a matter that should …
Yes. So the Chair will recognise now the Learned Member from constituency 36. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To Members of the House: So we begin this privilege motion, which is about the privileges of the House. It could not be more important a matter that should be dealt with because it involves the privileges of the House. And so, it cites the Minister of Finance, the Member for Devonshire East, for breach of priv ilege of this House in his role as Minister of Finance, as the steward of the public purse. That is what this motion does. It moves, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Finance, by his action, ex ante on two occasions, the first in the lead- up to the intended session of D ecember the 2 nd of last year, either failed or refused to provide the Project Agreement. That was the first matter of breach. As Mr. Speaker and Members of House will all now know as a matter of record, the House did not have a session. And so, the next breach of privilege following the release, Mr. Speaker, of the Project Agreement, after pressure from the Opposition, pressure from the public, pressure even, I may say, or i ndeed at least urgings from the counterparties to the Agreement between this Bermuda Government and Aecon, urgings from them that it be released, and, look, Mr. Speaker, even with urgings from Mr. Speak-er yourself, we had the resulting release of the Project Agreement in draft form. But, alas, Mr. Speaker, it was shorn of the f inancial modelling and details of finance that were normally attached to the appendix of the Project Agreement shared with us. So this, we say, com-pounded the earlier and original refusal to share with Members of the House vital information to inform the debate and to put elected representatives, Mr. Speak-er, in the position of representing the people of this country on what is one of the most important capital projects in our country, requiring not only the infor-mation to be shared with us, but the information to be shared so that proper parliamentary scrutiny can be applied to this most important, dare I say historic, air-port development project. And so, that is the substance or summary of the fact of the privilege breach, or the breach of privilege, the refusal and failure by the Member for D evonshire East, having shared the Project Agreement, but having originally failed to do so, getting the cou ntry and the Members of the House in a state of being impeded in dealing with this Bill when releasing the Project Agreement, alas, the financial modelling is absent. Mr. Speaker, may I pause there? When we originally, through the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Minister of Finance, requested the Project Agreement, it was in full recognition, Mr. Speaker, that the financial modelling would be attached to it. Dare I say, Mr. Speaker, that it was both an expectation and a reasonable one at that —and a reasonable one at that—that the nitty -gritty (if I may use the casual word) of the Project Agreement would be revealed. Because that is precisely what we wanted to see, inspect and analyse. And so, this is why the second action of the Member for Devonshire East so compounds his first action, until persuaded, his first action of not sharing the Project Agreement. A little now, Mr. Speaker, about the nature of privilege. Mr. Speaker, according to Erskine May, “Parliamentary privilege is the sum of the peculiar rights enjoyed by each House . . .”—this one and the other place —“collectively and by Members of each House individually . . .” Reading around this question of privilege that I have had the honour to examine, one understands that privilege is encompassing of matters of which we are now dealing with, informing Members of the House about what, with document ation or, indeed, calling witnesses if we are at a com-mittee level, informing Members of the House so that they can make rational, intelligent, meaningful dec i498 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly sions in this place, the legislature. It is so fundamental. We will hear, too, privilege extends to just the general operation of this House, maintaining its dign ity, maintaining its value as a place that has parliamentary oversight. It is fundamentally important is the point I am seeking to underscore, Mr. Speaker. And speaking of dignity, we have had the example in the last session. Not reflecting, but it gives an example of how privilege works. This morning on the apology r equired of a Member and on that other event where another front bench Minister used words in this House that affronted the dignity of this House, this is all about privilege. And, Mr. Speaker, you were correct, I say with respect, to be jolted in your seat about both of those incidents relating to the dignity of this House. It keeps the House privilege intact, preserved so that the business of the country is not trammelled by i ndignant actions. But back to the question no less important, Mr. Speaker, of Members of this House and the other place being put in a position to understand what they are about to deliver a vote upon. So it is the sum of our rights that we have both individually and collectively, without which, Mr. Speaker, we could not di scharge our functions and which exceed the privileges of those possessed by any other body or any other individual. So it is set apart from all other persons, such as the specific and specialised nature of what we do in these places, these parliaments. Fundamentally, Mr. Speaker, it is only as a means to the effective discharge of collective func-tions of the House that the individual privileges are enjoyed by Members. When any of these ri ghts and immunities are disregarded by the failure or refusal to disclose documents, we say in this case, whenever they are disregarded or attacked, the offence is called “breach of privilege.” It is punishable under the law of parliament. Mr. Speaker, breaching the laws of this parliament, breaching the privileges of this parliament is provided for under our Parliament Act 1957. And if Members care to even look at it for just a moment, one would see that provision has been made in the Parliament Act for the punishments for breach. It could be for matters such as this if it involves a fine; it involves even imprisonment. I state these things, Mr. Speaker, to underscore the statutory provision and importance of what we are discussing in this motion. So it is sanctioned by sanctions of fine and imprisonment. It may be open to argument, Mr. Speaker, that there are other sanc-tions that you as the presiding officer of this House could impose. I need to look at that even more car efully. I underscore fines and imprisonment because that is what is in our Parliament Act. Whilst I am open-ing the Parliament Act 1957, Mr. Speaker, and with your permission, I refer to section 30 thereof. That section is entitled “Summoning of witnesses.” And so, it provides that the chairman of a legislative committee may issue a summons under his hand to any person, requiring that that person attend as a witness before a committee at any time and place specified. Section 30(2) is the one that I wish to draw the Honourable Members’ attention to. It says that, “Without prejudice to anything in sections 32, 33 or 34, a summons to attend before a legislative committee may require the person summoned” —and here are the operative words —“to produce to the legislative committee on so attending any document, specified or referred to in the summons . . .” Section 30 merely, therefore, speaks to the whole question of how the privilege of this House, under statutory language, can command not only the witness, but documents to appear before us for all of the reasons that I began in the opening paragraphs, or my opening statement. Mem-bers of the legislature are here for singular purposes, to make good law, to make effective law, and we can-not do that without being informed about what we are debating and making approvals for by our votes. So, each House claims the right to punish as contempt “actions which, while not breaches of any specific privilege, obstruct or impede [either House] in the performance of its functions, or are offences against its authority or dignity, such as disobedience to its legitimate commands or libels upon itself, its Members or its officers.” That is May, Parliamentary Practice, the 21 st Edition. The overarching issue, Mr. Speaker, before the House, in my opinion, is captured in M ay’s words “impede it in the performance of its functions,” without which we could not discharge our functions. Those are the operative words of what, I submit to this Honourable House, we have been ex-posed to. We have been impeded by the Devonshire East M ember’s refusal to disclose the financial modelling and any other relevant financial details to this $250 million contract, on the face of the record, but with all of the public attention and analysis that has been going on, we now know that over the 30- year period of this airport agreement, the figure is just in excess of $1 billion. Its significance, therefore, rises in high relief. The jurisdiction—this is also important. Juri sdiction is the word. Or, what informs the jurisdiction of this House? What gives it its statutory power? I r eferred to it at the beginning. It is obviously Standing Order 13 of our House. And more importantly, it is section 45 of our Constitution. Standing Order 13(2), Mr. Speaker, provides that “Any Member proposing to raise a point of privilege, other than one arising out of proceedings in the Chamber during the course of a sitting day” —which is your point about its happening within an hour —“shall give to the Speaker a written statement of the point at least one (1) hour prior to raising the question . . .” [Section 13(3)(a) –(c) states,] “In the case of an alleged breach of privilege—
Bermuda House of Assembly “(a) The Member must first make a complaint to the Speaker that there has been a breach of priv ilege and then declare that he intends to propose a motion to that effect. “(b) The motion must set out the accusation in explicit but moderate terms, together with the facts of the case. It must propose that the House come to a decision on the alleged breach after consideration by the House or after considering a report from the Rules and Privileges Committee . . . The motion is not susceptible to amendment or division.” And then just dealing with the point that I think, Mr. Speaker, you made, “(c) The . . . Member whose conduct is impugned may speak for twenty minutes . . .” And the Member making the motion may speak for 20 minutes. “When they have concluded, the matter shall either be considered by the House or a Select Committee . . .” So that is [a portion of] Standing Order 13. The Constitution is a document. And section 45 is the section, Mr. Speaker, which underpins the jurisdiction of privilege. It provides in really specific and simple terms that this House is in charge of its own rules and procedure and can make them. Ther efore, when a Member of this House requests —we are all Honourable Members in this House—requests that a document be presented to this House in connection with a debate, the Constitution empowers Members to do this in this place and in the other place. And it does so for good reasons, the reasons that I have indicated, that we do not gather in this Sessions House to do anything but useful, meaningful work. And what we say and what I say in this motion of privilege is that we cannot do meaningful work by flying in the dark and not understanding the implications of the financial modelling of a $250 million airport construction deal. So, I need not trouble Members of the House or you, Mr. Speaker, other than any further with the Constitution. I want to make the point that the Stan ding Order is the obvious rule that governs this House. But that Standing Order has been made pursuant to the Constitution. It could not be more jurisdictionally sound than is provided by section 45 of our Constit ution. Members will quickly realise, Mr. Speaker, that “In addition to the above mentioned privileges and immunities each House also enjoys certain cons equential powers necessary for the protection of its privileges and immunities. These powers are: to commit persons, whether they are members or not, for breach of privilege or contempt of the House; to com-pel the attendance of witnesses and to send for per-sons, papers and records; to regulate its procedure and the conduct of its business; to prohibit the publ ication of its debates and proceedings and to exclu de strangers.” So the Member of Devonshire East, the Mini ster of Finance, the steward of the public purse, has been requested to provide financial information, and he has refused to do so, notwithstanding the fact — and it is a fact that is a matter of public record—that Sunday last, in the morning during the radio talk show when the Leader of the Opposition spoke with the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Finance gave an undertaking to the probing question of the Leader of the Opposition, who complained or lamented that he did not have the financial modelling. The Minister of Finance on that day, Sunday last or the Sunday be-fore it, gave an undertaking that he would do so. But we are now, today, in this motion of privilege, in the position of not having those financial modelling [doc-uments]. And the explanation or excuse is that it is commercially sensitive. The Member for Devonshire East has the ce ntral constitutionally mandated office under section 96 of our Constitution, Mr. Speaker, having the full ste wardship and authorisation of our expenditure. That is his mandate. It is constitutionally underpinned, and he has this mandate of authorisation of our expenditure by laying before the House, annually, the Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure. Mr. Speaker, we charge the Honourable Member for Devonshire East as having treated this House as if it were a private contracting party, by praying in aid, Mr. Speaker, we will honour and r espect commercially sensitive material as the reason that we will uphold and t hereby deprive the people of Bermuda, by extension, but certainly us as their rep-resentatives, of this important financial information. So, he is treating this exercise or this request as if the party to the Aecon negotiations and the party to this intende d contract were not a government, G2G, but G2B, government to business. And this is the reason he has fallen, I respectfully say, into the error of this very motion today. Had the Minister of Finance viewed the negotiations with Aecon as an ordinary, normal government to government arrangement, which is what it was supposed to be . . . It was declared that the Government of Bermuda and the Government of Canada’s Canadian Commercial Corporation would be the two parties engaged. I do not wish to go through the sorrowful hist ory of how that story unravelled, where it became clear that the Minister was spending most of his negotiation and contact with the private party. And this is what has sent him wrong, in my respectful submission. How much time, Mr. Speaker? [Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Michael J. Scott: Keep going? Yes, all right. All right. So, I submit that this has been the problem with this issue, the Finance Minister’s treatment of this contract that has no tension in it at all. Good gover nments, Mr. Speaker . . . and these will be my concluding remarks. 500 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Good governments live and die by transparency. And so, we would have expected that in a negotiation with Aecon there would not have been the completely open hand of the Minister of Finance that has been shown, so that whatever Aecon asked for, Aecon got. And as long as the Minister obtained an airport, Aecon has everything. And, Mr. Speaker, we have set out, both in public pronouncements from the Opposition Leader, just the before- and-after situati on. So, Mr. Speaker, we commend this motion to Members of the House, saying and indicating that the privilege of this House has been breached and that the Honourable Member stands guilty of breach of privilege of this House.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Thank you, Honourable and Learned Member from constituency 36. So the Chair will now recognise the Minister of Finance, from constituency number . . . Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Eleven.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerEleven. Right, Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richa rds: Eleven, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerConstituency 11. Minister Richards. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, when I came here today, I did not expect to have to be standing here doing this, in addition to the other things I expected to do. But the Learned Member who just took his …
Constituency 11. Minister Richards. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, when I came here today, I did not expect to have to be standing here doing this, in addition to the other things I expected to do. But the Learned Member who just took his seat is speaking in terms of the law and the rules of the House. I would like to speak in terms of something that I know about, which is finance. One thing that he was right about is that the finances of this Government are my respons ibility. According to the Constitution, I am a steward of the public purse. And I think that myself and my colleagues have been the best stewards of the public purse that this country has seen in a long time. [Desk thumping] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The proof is in the pudding, Mr. Speaker. And the pudding says when the Opposition was the Government, and between the time they became the Government and the time they left Government, the public debt skyrocketed 774 per cent. That is the proof of stewardship. So, I will not be lectured to by the Honourable Member about ste wardship of the public purse, because their record is abysmal. That is the first point I want to make. The thing is, Mr. Speaker, that this is a transaction with a government and a private sector partner. We operate according to rules of the marketplace, not necessarily the rules of this House. The rules of the marketplace are the rules that you take when you do a transaction in the marketplace. So, let me give you an example, Mr. Speaker. And the type of — [Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Members. [Gavel] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: And the type of hypocrisy I am hearing today. It was only in October, Mr. Speaker, that as Minister of Finance I went out with other Government officials into that same marketplace, that financial marketplace. And we committed this country to a …
Honourable Members.
[Gavel]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: And the type of hypocrisy I am hearing today. It was only in October, Mr. Speaker, that as Minister of Finance I went out with other Government officials into that same marketplace, that financial marketplace. And we committed this country to a loan of $665 million for 10 years. That is approximately double the size of this airport transaction— $665 mi llion we borrowed in the marketplace. I did not hear a peep, a whimper, a question, a suggestion or even a subliminal thought from anyone on this side of the House, or any other side of the House, that they wanted to see the details of that transaction. Nobod y asked for details of that transaction. And I can tell you the bond indenture for that transaction is almost as thick as the one that we have for this. But nobody asked for that, a transaction that was double the size of the airport deal. And two years before that, Mr. Speaker, I went as Minister of Finance and borrowed $500 mi llion from that same international marketplace. And nary a whimper from the other side about looking for or looking at or requiring financial models.
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Nothing like that was the case —transactions much bigger than this.
[Gavel] [Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The thing is, Mr. Speaker, when we go out and transact business as a gover nment with the wider world, there are rules of the marketplace. And those rules generally cannot be changed. We are not big enough to change the rules of the marketplace. If we were the United States of America Treasury, hey, maybe we could bend those rules to suit our purpose. But even the USA cannot bend most of the rules. But we are Bermuda, a dot on the map. When we go out to do a financial transaction, the rules of the road are clear. We have counterpar-ties to this transaction. Everything that has been r eleased by myself, whether I released them voluntarily or whether I have released them at the request —or I guess he would say demand—of the Opposition, ev erything that we have released, we have had to have
Bermuda House of Assembly the permission of our counterparts. I cannot do it by myself. If I wa nt them to know that we are a respons ible to them, there has to be that trust. We signed a nondisclosure agreement, and I have said that a thousand times in this country. I r espect that, and they respect that. So, in order to r elease information that was considered to be private or confidential, I had to have the permission of the counterparties. And the amount of information that has been released in this transaction, Mr. Speaker, is un-precedented —unprecedented. The only other transaction that this Island has had like this is the construction of the Critical Care Wing at KEMH, which was done, I do not know how many years ago, but certai nly done under the former administration. A similar size; and the structure is the same. Not exactly the same, but the structure is similar. The P3 is like what we are doing here. And I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, the type of disclosure that the Opposition is asking for in this transaction . . . there is no resemblance to the discl osure that took place for that P3. Even though that transaction is finished, the building is done; the trans-action itself, the project agreement itself is under lock and key at KEMH. And you have to go through all kinds of procedures to get to see it. And even when you get to see it, lots of it is redacted. We have seen that. One of our colleagues went over there and did that.
[Inaudible interjection]
[Gavel]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerEverybody! Everybody! Quiet now. It is his time to speak. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: So, you know, Mr. Speaker, you heard me talking about earlier this week in the UK that a double standard exists. Well, guess what. We have a double standard here. Now, what is good for …
Everybody! Everybody! Quiet now. It is his time to speak.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: So, you know, Mr. Speaker, you heard me talking about earlier this week in the UK that a double standard exists. Well, guess what. We have a double standard here. Now, what is good for the goose does not seem to be good for the gander. It depends which shoe the foot is on, or which foot the shoe is on.
[Laughter]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Get that right. So, I just found it kind of laughable that there is this claim that not enough information has been r evealed. Mr. Speaker, we have disclosed over 1,00 0 pages of data in this transaction over the last two years. One thousand pages! And somehow, nothing is good enough. Now, let us get to the question of financial models. All right? First thing, people need to know what the financial model that is being requested is. The request is not for financial information for this transaction. That is not what the financial model that is being asked for is. That is not it at all. And I need to be perfectly and unmistakably clear. That is not the request that is being made. That is not what this is. In this context, the financial model does not mean, what are the financial arrangements of the transaction? B ecause we have revealed all of that already. The thing that is being required is the financial model of the company we referred to as Project Co, which I will soon talk about, whose proper name is Bermuda Skyport Corporation. They want the financial model for a private company. Project Co, or Skyport, has no Bermuda Government ownership, none what-soever —a private company. And that is the financial model that is being asked for. And so, you do not need that financial model to find out, or to determine, whether this transaction for the redevelopment of the airport is good for Bermuda or not. You do not need that. What I have done, Mr. Speaker, at the request of Members of the Opposition . . . they had questions about the financial arrangements of the transaction. So, what did I do? I flew in my team from New York and Toronto to meet with Members of the Opposition. They met with them in the Ministry of Finance for three hours, asked them all kinds of questions. I do not know; I was not there. But I know they were there for three hours. Flew them in at Government expense to talk to Members of the Opposition. Yet, I am bei ng impugned and saying that I have not revealed enough information? We have gone the extra mile, the extra 10 miles, the extra 100 miles here to disclose and i nform. The Opposition have had access to all the information that the Blue Ribbon Panel had access to—all of it. And the Chairman, when he made his presentation last week, was asked, Do you need this financial model to determine whether or not this is a good thing for Bermuda? And he said, No. You’ve got plenty of financial information. The thing is that my consultants revealed to them all of the inputs that go into that financial model. But the way they put it to me is this, Mr.
SpeakerThe SpeakerIf you are building a house, as an owner you get to see the plans, or even draw the plans if you want. You hire a contractor. You oversee what he does. You make sure he does the job properly. And when he is finished, he goes and you move …
If you are building a house, as an owner you get to see the plans, or even draw the plans if you want. You hire a contractor. You oversee what he does. You make sure he does the job properly. And when he is finished, he goes and you move into the house. But you do not keep his tools. The financial model for Skyport are the tools, the tools of the trade of the financial analysts. This is not information that belongs to the Bermuda Gover nment. It does not belong to us. And my counterparties have drawn the line at this. They said, No, you don’t need it, and we’re not giving it up. And, by the way, Mr. Speaker, as I said before, in financial markets they have their own rules. And in financial markets, such information is never given, with an N —never given. Never. 502 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly So, I am being impugned for not giving som ething that is never given in transactions like this. The Blue Ribbon Panel has said they can come to a conclusion without this information. But somehow, the Opposition says they cannot know anything without knowing this information. Well, you know, it is a bit strange there. So, I cannot comment on the legal nuances of this privilege thing. It is not something that I know about. But I do know something about this transaction. And I do know that we have gone to extreme lengths to reveal information to Members of this House and to the public about how this transaction works and how it affects government finances, how it affects the oper ations of the airport and how it affects the Bermuda economy as a whole. Members are able to make those decisions with the information we have. I mean, the problem that Members may have, Mr. Speaker, is that there has been so much information revealed, they are suffering from information overload. And that is one of the rea-sons I appointed that Blue Ribbon Panel because it needed some people who really knew finance to cut through all this stuff, look at it and come up with some decisive and incisive views on this transaction. And they have done that. So, the argument put forth by the Opposition is just another way to try to delay this thing one more time. They have been engaged in what we call in warfare a “rear guard action,” where they fight and then they fall back, and they fight and then they fall back, eventually hoping that we will give up. But you know what, Mr. Speaker? We are not giving up. We know this is good for Bermuda. And we are going to get this thing done for the sake of Bermuda. The charges by the Honourable Member, who is the Shadow Attorney General, are without any merit. There is one more thing I want to say here i nsofar as Project Co’s finances are concerned. The Project Ag reement has clearly stated what the profit ability, the target profitability will be. It is called internal rate of return. You know, you will hear a lot about that. But that has been made clear. What has also been made clear is how the Government of Bermuda is supporting this transaction through a minimum regulated revenue guarantee. What has also been made clear is how the Government of Bermuda will participate in profits that exceed that target internal rate of return. So, the idea that somehow we need to know the financial model so that these guys do not rip off Bermuda . . . that is no nsense. Because the contract says that if they have an internal rate of return over 15.9 per cent after their initial investment is paid back, the Government of Bermuda shares in that extra profit 50/50. That is what the Agreement says. So we know all that. We know how their profitability is going to affect the Bermuda Government’s finances and the people of Bermuda in general, and the economy of Bermuda. We know all those t hings. We know the inputs, and we know what share we are going to get. We know these things. The fixation on something they know that we cannot reveal is an excuse to try to derail this thing, which they have been trying to do from the very b eginning. So that is basically all I have to say, Mr. Speaker. Our rules are set by the marketplace. We just cannot sit here and decide that we want som ething. And if it is outside their parameter of the mar-ketplace, we can jump up and down all we like. You cannot get some things. Okay? Because there is a world out there that is much bigger than us. We are tapping it, we are accessing it, but they have got their own rules. And the financial model is one of those things that they do not give out. We have bent over backwards to provide all kinds of information. You ask CCC, you ask Aecon, they will tell you. The kind of information that they have revealed here in Bermuda is unprecedented. Even for them it is unprecedented. Even for them it is unprecedented! When you compar e that to the amount of information that was revealed for the only other thing that we have done in Bermuda that is rel atively similar, the contrast is stark. In that other thing with the hospital, the Government is on the hook for the payments. But nobody in Bermuda knows the d etails of that. I do not even know the details of that. The people of Bermuda do not know the details of that, yet Government is on the hook for it. Government is not going to be on the hook for this. Yet they want to know details that they cannot get. And the only reason they want to know it is be-cause they know they cannot get it. And in not getting it, they want to just derail this whole thing. This is politics at its worst, Mr. Speaker. Not what is good for Bermuda; it is what is good for the Opposition. That is what this is about. And I think we have had a bit too much of this. Quite frankly, I have had enough of it. We need to start thinking about moving this country for-ward. And that is what this project will do, move this count ry forward, employ Bermudians, bring infrastructure investment into this country. And it will give us a strategic asset that will take us into the future way past what anyone in this room will be around to see. You will all be pushing up daisies. I am speaking for you, too. You will be pushing up daisies, and this as-set will still be giving to this country. Let’s think about being progressive here. The Opposition has got progressive in its name; let us start being progressive. Let us start being progressive here. This is a progressive transaction. It is a transac-tion that will take us into the future in the long run. I have not —repeat, not—breached my responsibilities as Minister of Finance. I take my responsibilities as Minister of Finance very, very seriously. Very seriou sly. And in doing so, we have actually improved the
Bermuda House of Assembly finances of this government in the process, because I have taken it seriously. So, I could sort of go way off on that. But I am just trying to stick to the point here. And the point is that the Honourable Member accused me of treating this like it was some sort of private deal. If this was a private deal, Mr. Speaker, why would I issue 1,000 pages of information? You do not do that if it is a pr ivate transaction. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. All right. Thank you, Members. And what we will do now is, because the Member making the motion has asked that it be r esolved, that the House come to a decision on the complaint as alleged against the said Minister of F inance. So, those …
Thank you, Honourable Member. All right. Thank you, Members. And what we will do now is, because the Member making the motion has asked that it be r esolved, that the House come to a decision on the complaint as alleged against the said Minister of F inance. So, those who are in favour of the fact that it is a breach, those in favour of the fact that it is a breach, say Aye.
AYES.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThose against, say Nay. NAYS.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIt sounds like the Nays have it. [Motion defeated: Matter of Privilege re: Finance Mi nister’s failure to disclose information pertinent to debate on Airport Authority Bill 2017 and Airport Devel-opment Concessions Act 2017, failed] PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere are n one. NOTICE OF MOTIONS FOR THE ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE ON MATTERS OF URGENT PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere are none. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Chair will recognise the Minister of Finance, Minister Bob Richards. GOVERNMENT BILLS FIRST READING INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION (TAX INFO RMATION EXCHANGE AGREEMENTS) AMEN DMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2017 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am introducing the following Bill for its first reading so …
The Chair will recognise the Minister of Finance, Minister Bob Richards.
GOVERNMENT BILLS
FIRST READING INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION (TAX INFO RMATION EXCHANGE AGREEMENTS) AMEN DMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2017
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am introducing the following Bill for its first reading so that it may be placed on the Order Paper for the next day of meeting: International Cooperation (Tax Information Exchange Agreements) Amendment (No. 2) Act 2017.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. OPPOSITION BILLS
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere are no Opposition Bills. PRIVATE MEMBERS’ BILLS
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere are no Private Members’ Bills. NOTICES OF MOTIONS
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThe Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 17, MP Walton Brown. REJECTION OF GOVERNMENT’S REVISED IMM IGRATION POLICY MARGINALISING BERMUDIAN ENTERTAINERS
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Mr. Speaker. Good afternoon, colleagues. Mr. Speaker, I give notice that at the next day of meeting, I propose to move the following motion: WHEREAS Bermuda’s entertainers are a critically important part of our history, culture and tourism fabric; AND WHEREAS there is an abundance of l ocally …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Good afternoon, colleagues. Mr. Speaker, I give notice that at the next day of meeting, I propose to move the following motion: WHEREAS Bermuda’s entertainers are a critically important part of our history, culture and tourism fabric; AND WHEREAS there is an abundance of l ocally available, exceptionally talented musicians, singers, and other performance and visual artists; BE IT RESOLVED that this Honourable House reject the Government’s revised immigration policy , which marginalises Bermudian entertainers and limits their opportunities.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, MP Brown. ORDERS OF THE DAY
The SpeakerThe SpeakerWe now move to Orders of the Day. And the first Order is the Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2016, in the name of the Minister of Finance. BILL SECOND READING 504 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly BERMUDA AIRPORT AUTHORITY ACT 2017 Hon. E. T. (Bob) …
We now move to Orders of the Day. And the first Order is the Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2016, in the name of the Minister of Finance.
BILL
SECOND READING
504 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly BERMUDA AIRPORT AUTHORITY ACT 2017
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker and Honourable Members of this House, I introduce now the Bill entitled the Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2016.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. [Pause]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Sir. May I proceed?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you. The purpose of the Bill is to create the Bermuda Airport Authority (which I will refer to as either “the Authorit y” or “BAA”), which will take on respons ibility for general administration, control and management of the L. F. Wade …
Yes. Proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you. The purpose of the Bill is to create the Bermuda Airport Authority (which I will refer to as either “the Authorit y” or “BAA”), which will take on respons ibility for general administration, control and management of the L. F. Wade International Airport and to oversee the redevelopment of the airport by the C anadian Commercial Corporation, a Crown corporation of the Government of Canada, and its maintenance and operation by Bermuda Skyport Corporation, Lim-ited (which I will refer to hereinafter as “ Skyport ”). Skyport, Mr. Speaker, was formerly referred to as Project Co in many discussions here and in the public in Bermuda. The establishment of the semiautonomous agency is a requirement under the Airport Development Agreement dated August 24, 2015. This Bill is one of the two Bills required to support the Airport Development Project and facilitate the transaction as documented in the Project Agreement. The other Bill is the Airport Concession Act 2016, which will be debated next. Mr. Speaker, our present airport terminal has kind of grown like topsy over the decades and is obv iously on its last legs. This fact was clearly established by a work performed under the former Government between 2006 and 2008 in an airport master plan, which concluded that the terminal was already, at that time 10 years ago, past its useful life. Now, of course, it is on borrowed time. If we were going to re- establish Bermuda as a top-echelon tourist destination, one that charges the kind of premium prices that can be found in our hotels, the visit or experience from beginning to end would have to be such that these affluent visitors would r eturn home satisfied that they had received value for money. The typical beginning and end of the visitor experience in Bermuda is located at our airport —the first and last impression of our Island. The shabby state of the terminal undercuts the good work that is being done by the Bermuda Tourism Authority in attracting visitors to the Island and ensuring that they have had a positive on- Island experience. In fact, the shabby state of the terminal belies the heroic efforts of the dedicated staff down there to keep it going. Similarly, on the international business front, we have endeavoured to tell the world that Bermuda is a premium offshore financial jurisdiction— the gold standard, I am told. As Finance Minister, I have told the world that we are a modern first -class well - regulated country where intellectual capital is ready to be accessed in the City of Hamilton, whereby bus inesspeople can conveniently, within just a few city blocks, access our world- class experts in insurance, banking, legal, accounting and the regulator —a co nvenience that is unsurpassed anywhere in the world. The problem is, Mr. Speaker, that they have to transit our Third World airport in order to access our vaunted First World intellectual capital. Indeed, there are Third World islands with airports that put us to shame. Again, the first and last impression at the airport undermines the perceived quality of services we seek to portray to the world. In fact, every single job in Bermuda, both in government and in the private sec-tor, is supported by these services that we sell to the world —international business and hospitality. As we emerge from the dark, depressing, i ndeed frightening, valley of our six -year recession, the time has come for the Government to lead the way forward, not only for short -term benefits to Bermudians, but also for strategic positioning for long- term growth and prosperity. A new, modern, purpose- built terminal at our gateway fulfils both those vital objec-tives. Constraining factors . Mr. Speaker, when considering a major project like a new airport terminal building, the Government set out some parameters, or constraining factors, that any such project would have to be guided by. These parameters related to the state of government finances —most particularly, the very high level of public debt. We did not want the co nstruction of a new terminal to have a material impact on the already dangerous levels of public debt. We al so were aware, from experience with previous capital projects, of the very real risks to the Consolidated Fund of project overruns. Historically, overruns of various infrastructure projects have cost the Treasury hundreds of millions of dollars, of extra dollars. The current level of debt made a repeat of such events quite intolerable. We also knew that the only other project of similar magnitude, the Critical Care Wing of the KEMH, used a public/private partnership, or P3, to successfully protect against budget overruns. But the structure of that P3 did not protect the Government against increased public debt, as the debt from that project is guaranteed by the Consolidated Fund and therefore would be considered as part of broader pub-lic obligations by cred it rating agencies. If we were to adopt that P3 model, the mere size of this additional guarantee would likely cause an
Bermuda House of Assembly impairment of Bermuda’s creditworthiness from a rating agency perspective, thereby exposing us to dow ngrades and higher debt service costs. Debt service is already one of the largest line items in Government’s Budget and—I can tell you this —will overtake health care in this coming fiscal year. We estimated what we could afford, then tried to figure out what kind of terminal could be built within those parameters. Because of this approach and the fact that virtually all the major parameters are of a financial nature, the Minister of Finance has led this project, instead of the Minister of Tourism Development and Transport or of Public Works. Those two ministries have, however, worked closely with the Ministry of Finance to move the project forward. So any financing arrangement would have to pass these overarching financial tests. Consequently, we needed to find a structure that was different from that of past projects if this was going to get done—a public/private partnership. Mr. Speaker, the structure of this project is a public/private partnership, P3. There are three princ ipal players in this P3: 1) the Bermuda Government; 2) Canadian Commercial Corporation, representing the Canadian Government; and 3) Aecon Inc., the private sector partner. So, two of the three partners are go vernment entities. Mr. Speaker, our detractors say we are privatising the airport. Nothing could be further from the truth! Ownership of the airport, what is there now and what will be built there, will at every step r emain 100 per cent owned by the people of Bermuda, through the Bermuda Airport Authority, which is set-ting up here now. So it is a 100 cent government - owned entity. The Department of Airport Operations has about 35 employees who will become employees of the concessionaire company, Skyport. There are over 400 people employed at the airport in various func-tions, most of whom already work for private cont ractors or work for various other government agencies, like Bermuda Customs and Immigration, US Customs and Immigration, airlines. All those people work at the airport. The changes for Department of Airport Oper ation staff do not materially affect the status of airport employees overall. Now, just by way of example, Mr. Speaker , the Government has contracted with private companies to operate concessions at Horseshoe Bay, Shelly Bay and Tobacco Bay. Have we privatised Hors eshoe, Shelly and Tobacco Bays? Cer tainly not. B ecause they will still belong to the people of Bermuda. Mr. Speaker, I just returned, as you know, from the UK this week, flying out of Gatwick Airport. London Gatwick is indeed privatised, as is Heathrow, as is London City Airport, as in virtually all the airports in United Kingdom. These British airports are owned and operated by private entities. I heard the other day that a prominent labour union member said that we would be the laughing stock of the world if somebody else operated our air port. Mr. Speaker, having s omebody else operate your airport is the norm abroad. Just by way of example, Mr. Speaker, Gatwick and City Airport are operated by a fund that is owned by a Nigerian, Adebayo Ogunlesi. Gatwick is owned and operated by a Nigerian. That is privatisation, Mr. Speaker. [That is] not what is happening here in Bermuda. We are shifting the financial and execution risks of building a new terminal to outside entities while retaining ownership of it. This structure is a P3 structure, not privatisation. Procurement . Mr. Speaker, it is important to set the record straight after many, many months of misinformation, baseless speculation and conspiracy theories about the procurement process and who chose whom at the outset. This should not be news to this House because the answer can be found in the overall business case section of the [Overall Business Case –] Entrustment Report, one of those 1,000 pages that I talk about, Appendix 5, Section IV, entitled “Considerations Given To CCC Airport P3 Subco ntractor Selection:” “The Government’s due diligence enquiries i nto CCC’s selection process of its subcontractors di sclosed this information.” And, Mr. Speaker, I am kind of quoting from this Entrustment Report . “How does CCC choose a supplier for a pr oject: “CCC usually becomes aware of the projects that might be suitable for a government -togovernment contracting approach in one of two ways: either a Canadian company who is aware of the pr oject opportunity contacts CCC or the purchasing Go vernment contacts CCC directly about the project. D epending who makes the request, CCC tail ors its su pplier selection approach.” (CCC never initiates the first contact.) “If a Canadian company reaches out and is looking for the option of a government -to-government approach for the project, CCC”: “1) Verifies if the company has a proven track record with CCC for projects. “2) Accesses the viability of the opportunity, assessing if the potential deal is a good fit for a gov-ernment -to-government contracting model. “3) Determines whether it can support the supplier. “4) Screens prospective suppliers on various criteria and requires that its suppliers pass its integrity compliance and due diligence process.” (Ultimately, it is always CCC that chooses the supplier, as not all suppliers meet these criteria.) “CCC treats all potential opportunities on a case -by-case basis and assesses opportunities in consultation with the Canadian companies and foreign governments involved.” Mr. Speaker, how did CCC select the Aecon Group for this project? In the case of the redevelop506 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly ment of our airport, CCC was introduc ed to the potential opportunity by Aecon. Up to that point, there had been no contact whatsoever between Aecon and the Bermuda Government. CCC had recent experience with Aecon Group on a similar project for the redeve lopment of an airport at Quito, Ecuador, a project in which Aecon demonstrated its ability to deliver a complex infrastructure project in a way that was sensitive to the needs of the community, while having a positive impact on their community from the perspective of employment and environmental concerns. In addition, the Aecon Group is seen as a leader in the development of public/private partnerships and has successfully partnered over 25 P3 pr ojects, both domestically and internationally, ranging from transportation and water infrastructure to hospital and airport development. As a strong performer in CCC’s roster of C anadian companies, CCC was open to working with Aecon in Bermuda. At that first meeting in Toronto, CIBC (Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce) played a classic broker/advisor role by connecting potential partners together. CCC participated in the first meet-ing in June 2014 with myself, the Attorney General, the General Manager of the Department of Airport Operations, the Financial Secretary, the former Gen-eral Manager of the Quito Airport and Aecon to assess the viability of the opportunity and to determine if the project was a good fit for a government -togovernment contracting model. CCC Business Development Directors subs equently travelled to Bermuda four times to further clarify the project and interest in exploring a gover nment -to-government approach. Between June and November 2014, an MOU (Memorandum of Under-standing) was negotiated and signed on November 10 th, 2014, between CCC and the Government of Bermuda, which was represented by Yours Truly. This MOU allowed for the mutual exploration of a gover nment -to-government approach for the airport project. During the subsequent summer, the three entities—the Government of Bermuda, CCC and Aecon —signed a preliminary contract that set out the major heads of agreement and parameters of a trans-action that was to be negotiated. The contract was called the Airport Development Agreement. Optimal solutions . Mr. Speaker, Government in its published options document, which outlined four options, is, in fact, an abridged version of a more thorough, detailed analysis. This analysis can be found at Appendix 3 in the Entrustment Report, where 10 overall options are analysed, ranging from what we have called the expensive band a ids approach, which is the status quo, all the way to full privatisation. I refer anyone who is interested in such details to that doc ument. We distilled all of that down to four basic op-tions: expensive band aids; the current default option; design/build— design, build, finance, operate and maintain; and the government -to-government approach. Clearly, the traditional arrangements used in Bermuda in the past would not comply with the estab-lished financial parameters. What we now call the d esign/build model, the traditional government procur ement model, was untenable. This model prescribes government borrowing for finance. Perhaps, Mr. Speaker, in 2006 and 2008, if money had been put aside each year to build a war chest to help finance a new terminal, this option might now be available. But we know that did not happen. In fact, the opposite happened. Deficits and debt ballooned under the former administration. Moreover, previous attempts to use performance bonds to constrain overruns had failed to protect the public purse in the past. We are already using expensive band aids down there at the airport, Mr. Speaker. This fixing- up and patching- up is proving to be quite expensive i ndeed and only throwing good money after bad, while not addressing the core of the problem. It is very much like when you have an old car. It gets to a point where there is no point in putting expensive parts on that old rusted- out chassis. In any case, you can ne ver get off -balance sheet financing with the expensive band aids approach. All expenditure will increase the deficit and the debt. Then there is the design and build, finance, operate and maintain model. This is an off -balance sheet model that entails placing the whole thing out to tender. This is, broadly speaking, the model used to construct the new Acute Care Wing at KEMH, without the operate part. This model requires that Gover nment would have to make guarantees. This may have been acceptable back when that hospital project was envisaged. But Bermuda did not have the level of debt then that it has now. We have, of course, been dow ngraded also since that time, by rating agencies. This model also requires what is called a substantial completion payment, sort of like a down payment on a house or a car. As you can imagine, if you are building a house for $267 million, any down payment proportional to that loan amount would have to be quite sub-stantial. Again, by way of reference, in the KEMH P3, such a payment was indeed required. It was in the form of a $44 million Bermuda Hospital Charitable Trust loan it raised to make that financial debt, that substantial payment. And they have been selling all kinds of things, bricks and all kinds of things, to help pay that off. That is what that was. Plus, of course, in that particular transaction, the Government had to guarantee the debt. There is another troubling aspect of this particular model that I am talking about. And that is that no airport with less than a million passengers a year transiting it has ever successfully transacted a ten-dered design, build, finance, operate and maintain transaction—never happened. You have all kinds of
Bermuda House of Assembly examples in the Caribbean where it was tried and failed. So there is a real risk that we could go through all the trouble and expense with consultants. And be-lieve me; I know we paid money to these consultants. But it would have been a heck of a lot more with co nsultants and publishing of an RFP and come up with nothing. The Steer Davies Gleave Value for Money report verifies this to be true. So, in the final analysis, the governm ent-togovernment design, build, finance, operate and mai ntain model ticked all the boxes in terms of mitigation of government balance sheet risk, overrun risk, as well as sheer affordability, and the bringing to bear of world -class expertise and experience in a project as specialised as this. Now, Mr. Speaker, you can see that also in the Value for Money report here. There is a page there, the last page of the Executive Summary, this page I have in front of me, where I have the boxes. And they are all ticked, literally. The boxes are all ticked with this particular approach. That is by a third party value for money assessment. So, Mr. Speaker, Canada, through CCC, is the only G20 country that offers this government -togovernment model. Steer Davies Gleave, the value for money consultant report, confirms this. The structure . Mr. Speaker, the final “P” in the P3 project stands for “ partnership.” In a successful partnership, each partner must contribute something and each partner must benefit from the partners hip. What are Bermuda’s contributions? Well, Bermuda’s contributions are: • electricity subsidy; • the retained services; (those are Air Traffic Control, Fire and Rescue, Bermuda Weather Service and Ground Electronics); • minimum regulated revenue guarantee; • departure taxes and associated fees that we are transferring over to them; • customs duty and associated fee relief; and • the cost of the Bermuda Airport Authority, the quango.
What are CCC/Aecon’s contributions? They will: • design Bermuda’s first purpose- built air term inal and apron areas; • construct a new terminal and apron areas; • demolish and renovate the old terminal; • assume all construction risks; • finance the project, both equity and debt; • service and repay that debt; • operate and maintain the facility; • deliver the requisite expertise; • train Bermudians; • develop new revenue streams; • diminish performance risk to traffic and anci llary revenues. What are Bermuda’s benefits? • obtain a modern purpose- built new airport terminal (it’s a major job creator ); • complete off-balance sheet finance; • elimination of airport operating costs and some capital expenditures; • upside revenue sharing; • expertise transfer through training; and • economic stimulus.
What are CCC/Aecon’s benefits? Their benefits are: • Skyport, which they ow n or partially own. • They get returns on their debt and equity.
Mr. Speaker, I will not go through all these things in detail. But certain of Bermuda’s contributions need to be explained in some sort of detail. First of all, all of Government’s contributions are made so that the project can be economically viable. That means that the risk adjusted investment returns for investors would be attractive enough so that institution investors of both equity and debt would be available. For the debt portion, risks had to be mitigated enough for the project to have an investment grade rating. If we did not have that, that would be too expensive and that project would not happen. So, in layman’s terms, if the project is not vi able, there will be no investm ent money. And therefore, the project would be dead. An investment grade rating enables the borrowing to be at a lower interest rate. For the debt portion, preliminarily, the tenure of the notes will be 25 years at an appropriate interest rate. Preliminari ly also, the arrangements described here, rating agencies have indicated the project can be as-cribed an A - rating. For equity investors, the risks are much, much higher. Their target return, internal rate of return, is 15.9 per cent. If the project fails, equity i nvestors could lose all their money. Again, details of these contributions are d escribed in the memorandum that I laid in Parliament on November 28 th of last year, as well as in the more detailed Entrustment Report. Retained government services . Mr. Speaker, these are services currently provided and paid for by the Government that will remain part of Gover nment expenses after consummation of the transaction. Such functions are generally considered part of the airport functions. These include Air Traffic Control, Bermuda Weather Service, Bermuda Fire and Rescue and Ground Electronics. The dollar figures are out-lined in the Explanatory Memorandum I laid in N ovember. Air Traffic Control, Weather Service and Ground Electronics are part of the Airport O perations Department’s budget. Bermuda Fire and Rescue was never budgeted for the DAO [Department of Airport Operations]. The retention of these expenses i mproves the viability of the project. Much has been made about the fact that these retained services, along with the costs of the 508 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Bermuda Airport Authority, would be a government expense that would no longer be covered by airport revenue. The memo that I keep referring to was pr esented to Parliament, and it is on the last page of that memo. The figure is $18.3 million that some say Go vernment will lose. That conclusion, however, excludes an estimated $184 million of capital expenses that will be necessary over the next two years if Government sticks to the expensive b and aid plan. The government -to-gover nment plan avoids these CAPEX [Capital Expense] costs. That avoided cost covers over 10 years of the Current Account expensive band aids airport costs. And then there would be escalating maintenance costs on top of that because the facility would still be ageing. So this narr ative of lost revenues costing Government $18.3 million a year is false and not reality based. It is ironic that the Opposition is so concerned about government deficits now that they are in Opposition. Too bad they did not have the same concern when they were the Government, running deficits at historic levels, i ncreasing the national debt by 774 per cent. Furthermore, as Bermuda Weather Service, Fire and Rescue, Air Traffic Control and Ground Electronics are already being paid for by the Government, these contributions that I am talking about to the pr oject will not cost Government any extra money. Energy subsidy . Mr. Speaker, Bermuda has agreed to provide a financial subsidy for the electricity that will be required by the airport during the concession term. That subsidy will insulate the project from Bermuda’s high and volatile energy prices and will, in turn, lower the cost, thereby increasing the viability of the project. The Government will not subsidise elec-tricity consumed by operators of the airport’s retail concessions in the new terminal. In order to help offset the expense associated with the airport energy subsidy, the Government is developing a photovoltaic project at the Finger. Reve-nues from this project will help offset the cost of this subsidy. However, like the retained services, Go vernment is already paying for the electricity at the ai rport. So the extra cost of this contribution will also be limited. Minimum regulated revenue guarantee . Mr. Speaker, the forecast regulated revenues for the ai rport is based around a central case, a central case forecast, for traffic. Everything hangs on this. And this central case forecast for traffic forecasts a 0.75 per cent per annum growth rate over the course of the concession, which means that the forecast traffic at the end of 30 years of the concession will reach the level actually obtained in 2007 —a very conservative forecast indeed. The worst -case scenario, or lower threshold, is considerably below that. Government will commit to a regulated revenue guarantee for the project in order to ensure its financial viability. The Government needs to mitigate an historical 30- year secular decline in passenger traffic by providing a limited guarantee that will be tied to a minimum revenue threshold driven by passenger traffic volumes. Mr. Speaker, forecast regulated revenues for the airport are based around a central case forecast for traffic. Everything hangs on this. And this central case forecast for traffic forecasts a 0.75 per cent per annum growth rate over the course of the concession, which means that the forecast traffic at the end of 30 years of the concession will reach the level actually obtained in 2007, a very conservative forecast indeed. The worst case scenario or lower threshold is consi derably below that. Government will commit to a regulated rev enue guarantee for the project in order to ensure its financial viability. The Government needs to mitigate an historical 30- year secular decline in passenger traffic by providing a limited guarantee that will be tied to a minimum revenue threshold driven by passenger traffic volumes. This minimum revenue guarantee (which I am calling an MRRG, I do not want to get it confused with the MRGs we have for airlines, so I am doubling the Rs) . . . the MRRG significantly enhances the credit profile of the project. Current forecasts, even under an extreme downside scenario, do not result in the MRRG being triggered. If regulated revenues fall below the annual MRRG threshold, which is the worst case scenario, the Government would be required to subsidise those revenues by contributing any difference between the revenue that year and the worst case scenario and put that money into a trust account. As per the Project Agreement, Skyport would only be able to access the funds from that trust account to pay lenders if project cash flows were insufficient to pay the lenders. In the event that project cash flows are sufficient to pay lenders, Skyport will not be entitled to draw from the trust account. In this way guarantee payments cannot be used to bolster returns to Aecon and its partners. So to be clear, Mr. Speaker , there is no Government guarantee of Aecon’s profits. Additionally, in the event that the trust account balance is equal to or great er than the next year’s debt service, Bermuda will not be required to contribute to the trust account irrespective of whether regulated revenues are below the threshold in the Project Agreement. Finally, it is important to note that the MRRG will only be i n effect during the term of the senior debt, that is, 25 years. Once the senior debt matures, all funds in the trust account (if there are any) will be r eturned to the Government of Bermuda. There are countless other reasons why Skyport could default on its debt, but this MRRG does not cover those reasons. Therefore, it is not an outright guarantee of the debt and it should not impact Bermuda’s credit rating, nor result in consolidation of project borrowing on Bermuda’s balance sheet as public debt or public borrowing. KPMG has confirmed
Bermuda House of Assembly this. Credit rating agencies are fully aware of this a pproach and are on board. How will airport operations be overseen by the Government? Mr. Speaker, airport operations will be overseen by the quango, the company that we are incorporating right now —the Bermuda Airport Authority — which will administer the Agreement and supervise Skyport’s performance of its obligations as specified in the Project Agreement. This is the first airport -related Bill before us today. The remit of the Authority includes monitoring key performance indicators, quality standards, and other performance obligations of Skyport, as well as all other matters pertaining to airport operations, i ncluding the approval of regulated fees. Additionally, the Author ity will be responsible for the provision of the retained Government services and by generating additional revenue- generating opportunities, for example, associated with potential Air Traffic Control. Government will be responsible for funding any costs a ssociated with BAA. The current estimated costs put out by the Department of Airport Operations suggest that the annual cost of this quango will be approximately $3.5 million, although this is under r eview by my Ministry. The Board of the Authority could i nclude members of the Ministries of Finance and Transport to represent Government’s interests with their respons ibilities including budget setting, access to international airport expertise, and identifying revenue- generating opportunities. No major change in ownership of Skyport can take place without the prior permission of the Berm uda Airport Authority. Who are the parties involved in this Agre ement? Mr. Speaker, through a series of transactions on financial close the Government will enter into a Project Agreement with CCC [ Canadian Commercial Corporation] and Skyport. Skyport will commit to the Authority that the new terminal will be designed and constructed, on time, on spec, and on budget. And CCC will commit to Skyport that the new terminal will be designed and constructed on time, on spec, and on budget. Aecon Construction will commit to CCC that the new terminal will be designed and constructed on time, on spec, and on budget. The Government and Skyport’s lend-ers will have “step- in” rights under the construction contract to ensure that they can enforce the construc-tion contract against CCC, thus safeguarding the Government from construction, quality, cost, and schedule risk. In addition to committing to the design and construction of the new terminal in accordance with the construction contract, CCC is liable for up to 45 per cent of the construction price in addition to the performance of the construction co ntract. If the new terminal is not completed by the agreed upon compl etion date, CCC must pay damages to Skyport, which in turn must pay damages to the Authority in the amount of a maximum of $15,000 per day, but no lower than $5,000 per day for each day the new ter-minal completion is delayed. CCC’s liability to Skyport for any cost overruns provides an additional buffer of approximately $125 million above the current co nstruction price to safeguard Bermuda from any construction risk. How much will it cost to build the new term inal? Based on cost estimates developed by Aecon, project construction costs are expected to be $267 million (and that is taking into account inflation). And demolition and renovation costs (also taking into ac-count inflation) are $60 million. The plan is for the current Departures building to be converted into offices. The rest of the old structure is to be demolished. This represents a significant decrease from the $514 million cost estimate that HNTB [Howard, Needles, Tammen & Berfendoff] put forward in 2008 in the 2008 Airport Master Plan and reflects a revised architectural design and reduced infrastructure development proposed by Aecon. Other financial costs take the overall cost up to $302 million. The construction of the new airport terminal is estimated to take 40 months. Some critics would say comparing the current plan to the 2008 plan is like comparing apples to oranges, implying that they are not comparable. But they are comparable to the extent that it shows the different approaches taken by the respective governments in developing a new ai rport terminal. It is more like comparing a PLP Rolls Royce —a luxury Rolls Royce—to an OBA practical Toyota. It is important to note that the former Government wanted to buy that Rolls Royce but could not figure out a way to finance it. This Government has chosen to buy the Toyota, a much more modest item, more practical and more economical.
[Inaudible interjections]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Just some metrics, Mr. Speaker , just some metrics . . . comparison. This new terminal is a reduction in square footage from the one that the former Government wanted to build. It is reduced in square footage by 24.7 per cent. There is a reduction in cost per square foot of 34.7 per cent and the reduction of costs of 50.78 per cent. In simple terms, the 2008 proposal versus the one we have before us today, it is clear which pr oposal is more economical; the terminal this Gover nment will build. As for technical aspects of value for money, Honourabl e Members should refer to the Value for Money Report by Steer Davies Gleave which clearly 510 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly states that Bermuda is getting value for money versus the two alternatives favoured by the Opposition. Mr. Speaker, as it is pretty obvious, this is a pretty complex agreement. The Project Agreement itself is about 600 pages, more or less. The only agreement comparable to this is the one that governs the KEMH (P3), which is still, as I mentioned earlier, under lock and key and is heavily redacted. And by the way, Mr. Speaker , whatever financial model that involved was never revealed. This Government will follow the precedent set by the Master Development Agreements we have concluded with hotel developers, whereby the finalised legal documents will be available for pub lic scr utiny, perhaps with some redactions, (but quite frankly I think everybody has seen what they are seeing now, so that might not be necessary) once they are execut-ed by the relevant participants. All the material as-pects of this transaction have been agreed and di sclosed to the public already. I will repeat that. All the material aspects of this transaction have been agreed and disclosed to the public already. But unfortunately the lawyers are still duking it out with arcane technical issues. Ther efore, as I have stated, the negotiations are still, as we speak, not yet completed, although the material items, obligations and parameters indeed have been settled. How will the project impact local employment? Mr. Speaker, Skyport will commit to ensuring that the development of the new terminal and oper ations of the airport will give priority to employing the local Bermudian labour and business. Key aspects of this Agreement that encourage local employment are: All Department of Airport Operation emplo yees have received Skyport employment offers. Skyport is obligated to provide employment offers which, on the whole, are no less favourable than current employment terms. If employees fail to accept Skyport or the Authority’s employment offers , then Government will retain these employees and the associated employment costs. To date all but six staff have accepted conditional offers from Skyport, the condition being that financial close is achieved. Airport Operations and employment across Skyport and the Bermuda Airport Authority is expected to increase 50 per cent over current staffing levels at the Depar tment of Airport Operations. Aecon’s construction is required to maximise the use of Bermuda- based companies and labour in the construction of the new airport terminal with approximately 60 per cent of the 400- plus construction jobs expected to be filled by Bermudian labour. Aecon has offered an internship programme to provide six months internship for seven Bermudians in the construction field, engineers and architects, with the op-portunity of employment during the construction phase following successful completion of the internships. I think people know about that already because it has been in the public domain. How will the project impact airport passengers? Mr. Speaker, airport passengers will benefit by travelling through a new modern terminal offering a significantly enhanced travel experience and with all the modern amenities found in other world- class ai rports consistent with Bermuda’s first -tier, first-class, first world -brand promise. This enhanced travel experience will be paid for in part through passenger fees set at a level consistent with international standards. It is estimated that passenger -related airport fees will be increased by approximately $20 to $23 per passenger from current levels upon introduction of a new airport infrastructure charge. Based on analysis of compar able airports in the Caribbean region, Bermuda passenger -related airport fees will come more in line with destinations such as Jamaica and the Bahamas. What commitments are Aecon and CCC making to the project? Mr. Speaker, as described earlier, both Aecon and CCC are committing to develop and construct a new terminal on spec, on time, on budget according to the Project Agr eement. From an operating perspective Skyport is providing a commitment to meet various key perfor-mance indicators and to provide IATA Level of Service Optimum (Optimum is a level of service). They are committed to providing an Optimum IATA Service Level during the term of the concession. One might wonder what that is. The best that I can do to explain that is to give you examples. If any of you have been to Hong Kong, that is an Optimum Level, Heathrow Terminal 5 is an Optimum Level, Terminal 3 in Toron-to is an Optimum level, and the new Bahamas airport is an Optimum Level. In addition to operating the airport, Skyport is committed to finance required maintenance capital expenditures relating to the terminal buildings, run-ways, taxiways and aprons during the life of the con-cession totalling over $630 million over the term of the concession. Governance. Mr. Speaker, Cabinet also approved the establishment of a governance structure for the Airport Redevelopment Project to provide the appropriate oversight of the project and to conduct the due diligence necessary to recommending final ap-proval for the commercial agreement to Cabinet. The governance structure has been developed in line with leading practice in similar P3 projects. The project is of national importance and the scale and complexity of the transaction require that an appropriate level of attention, direction, and decision- making is dedicated in order to reach final close within the agreed time lines. Therefore, the governance structure established a Project Board chaired by the Minister of Finance with representation of other key ministries with r esponsibility for oversight and decision- making in r egard to the project in order to ensure that timelines would be met. The Project Board is responsible for
Bermuda House of Assembly guiding the negotiations and reviewing the final draft of the Project Agreement in order to make a recommendation to Cabinet for approval of the terms. A Government Advisory Team (GAT) has also been established and is led by the Project’s co-directors . . . the support from our external project advisors. The GAT reports to the Project Board on adherence with major milestones and provides analysis and recommendations on commercial and financial terms, as well as design. The GAT co- directors are supported in negotiation of commercial, financial, and technical terms by our advisors as may be required. Financial Instructions, Mr. Speaker, as they presently stand, require a waiver from the Accountant General for a sole sourced project. This was obtained. A letter of agreement that the Accountant General initialled . . . that letter of agreement had no mention of Aecon whatsoever, although there was an explana-tion of the structure of the arrangement, which r eferred to a prime subcontractor, but not by name. Thi s was not . . . it was not until the Airport Development Agreement was signed that Aecon was officially part of the transaction, having been selected by CCC. Financial Instructions are meant to deal with procurements, not P3s. This all points to the inescap-able conclusion that Financial Instructions are curren tly not set up to deal with P3s or a G2G structures that we have here. It is like a square peg in a round hole. Another oddity is that Financial Instructions never en-visage a project leader would ever be the Ministry of Finance because, in this case, you have the strange situation of the Accountant General approving an a pplication from his boss, the Financial Secretary. So these are matters that will have to occupy the thoughts of the Government in the future in how to accommodate projects that do not fit the usual pr ocurement criteria. The constant drumbeat from the Opposition that Government has not followed Finan-cial Instructions is based on the theory that if you r epeat a falsehood long enough, peopl e will believe it. Mr. Speaker, I am here to make it unmistak eably clear that all waivers and permissions required by Financial Instructions have been adhered to by this Government. All requirements from Her Majesty’s Government for the Entrustment have been fulfilled. Does anyone really think that the Foreign and Com-monwealth Office would be content with this if the Bermuda Government had violated its own rules? In fulfilling the Entrustment requirements Government has satisfied procurement guidelines that are not even Bermuda’s. As for transparency, you know I said earlier, more information, over a thousand pages of information, have been disclosed to the public in this transaction, more information than any other project in the history of Bermuda. Of that there can be no doubt. Any claim otherwise is strictly empty political theatre and nothing more.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou have about 10 minutes left, Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker , I am running out of time and I want to . . . oka y, I am going to skip over something. Mr. Speaker, I want to address the Blue Ri bbon Panel. …
You have about 10 minutes left, Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker , I am running out of time and I want to . . . oka y, I am going to skip over something. Mr. Speaker, I want to address the Blue Ri bbon Panel. In view of the unprecedented blizzard of misinformation, innuendo, and outright falsehoods that have surrounded this project it is not surprising that many Bermudi ans were confused and did not know what or who to believe. The public argument about this project has morphed over time. Initially it was about whether we actually needed a new facility. That argument was pretty much settled by some graphic videos about what happens when it rains down there. Then the argument morphed into economics and f inance— number bombers, as I call them. It was for these reasons that the Government established the Blue Ribbon Panel, a panel of Berm udians who are independent and non- political and who have unimpeachable reputations for expertise in ec onomics, law, and finance, people either at or recently retired from being at the top of their professions. There is no doubt that most Bermudians acknowledge the individuals chosen for the Blue Ribbon Panel meet those criteria. And I can say here, Mr. Speaker , that I would like to publicly thank the members of the Blue Ribbon Panel —Mr. Craig Simmons, Mr. Barclay Si mmons, Mr. Anthony Joaquin, Mr. Gil Tucker, Ms. Car oline Foulger, and Mr. Malcolm Butterfield. Their remit was simple: look at the facts, cut through all the rhetoric, and render an opinion if this project was good as it was proposed, if it was good for Bermuda, if it makes commercial sense for Bermuda, if it is the appropriate decision to make given the ci rcumstances that Bermuda and the Government of Bermuda finds itself in today. They were invited to look at all the facts: reports, contracts, and public statements surrounding the project. They were invited to talk to anybody they liked, including the Gover nment’s consultants and the Project’s detractors. The Blue Ribbon Panel rendered its report on Wednesday. The headline of its conclusion was as follows: “In summary, we have found that this transac-tion is commercially sound and reasonable, likely to meet the Government’s stated objectives of long term sustainability, increased traffic volume and revenue, while effectively providing for the structural needs of the airport. We have also found that its terms are wit hin the parameters for similar P3 Airport projects and in some cases this project exceeds those norms pos itively.” The Blue Ribbon Panel also stated something I found to be interesting, Mr. Speaker: “Bermuda has been placed in the unenviable position of choosing a commercially reasonable deal, when absent our n ational financial position, this is an opportunity that could have best been placed in the hands of the peo512 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly ple through Government ownership. It is difficult to pass by the significance of this reality without commenting that Bermuda, under successive PLP and OBA Governments, has allowed its debt to reach a level to where taking full ownership of a project of this nature is not feasible. Our debt is a national threat no matter which political party is in Government.” The Blue Ribbon Panel refutes many of the points project detractors have raised, point by point, including those made by the Opposition. At the end of the day, particularly in finance, you can have your opinions but you cannot have your own facts. There have bee n many references and innuendos regarding the process to get us here. There was even a case where outright libellous statements were made over the media. Even though that matter has been r esolved, some people thrive on conspiracy theories. The Blue Ribbon Panel made an insightful observ ation: “Canadian companies who transact with CCC are also under a higher standard of personal liability, as they are subject to criminal prosecution in circum-stances where they seek to promote deals by way of corruption.” This Government was dealt a very bad hand by the former Government. This transaction repr esents the best way forward for the airport given the atrocious hand left us by the former Government. The incredible thing is that the only alternative the Oppos ition has proposed which is an alternative to this adds even more debt to the already burdened shoulders of taxpayers. Incredibly they have not learned their lesson yet. Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThree minutes. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Three minutes, three minutes, okay. With those remarks, Mr. Speaker, I would now open the subject for debate, and at some point we will read this Bill called the Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017 for the second time. Thank you very much.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Any other Member care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Leader of the Opposition, the Member from constituency 18, MP David Burt. You have the floor. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. E. David Burt: Mr. Speaker, I think that we have been discussing the airport for about 27 months, and it has been a long and exhaustive debate covering different topics from misleading statements to Parli a-ment, which again, continue today from the Minister of Finance who just took …
Yes.
Hon. E. David Burt: Mr. Speaker, I think that we have been discussing the airport for about 27 months, and it has been a long and exhaustive debate covering different topics from misleading statements to Parli a-ment, which again, continue today from the Minister of Finance who just took his seat, to PATI requests which revealed that all that was said to the people of this country was not true, to Aecon and CCC. You know, people coming to our town hall meetings. We see these wonderful PR campaigns which are all going to be paid for, ultimately, by us. And we saw what took place on December 2 nd. And that brings us here today. Now, Mr. Speaker , from the very beginning of this project the Progressive Labour Party has asked for one thing and one thing alone—transparency. And it is something that took a very long time to arrive at. Because when we look at the way that these projects are done throughout the world, when you have these types of projects in the United Kingdom, there is a lways a cross- party committee that is put together to ensure that both parties are on board. And why is that important? Because governments change. And when you have a 30 -year deal people need to be on board and comfort needs to be there. It is less risky for the country, it is less risky for the privatised contractor, or as the nice non- privatisation word is called, “concessionaire.” It is less risky for everyone. But that is not the process that this Government decided to go down. This Government decided to go down a pr ocess in the dark of night, kind of like how they showed up at 5:00 am this morning, in the dark of night, they decided that they were going to do this first and tell the people later. They just did not think that the people would find out the lies that they were being told all the time. But, Mr. Speaker , this debate is about more than an airport. This is about the priorities that we as a country have and the standard of government and governance which we should have. Now, I spoke about the 5:00 am entry of some Members of the House this morning. And it is as though if they are operating under this cloud of secr ecy. And it continues with the non- disclosure of a fina ncial model, which, Mr. Speaker, is going to be part of an agreement that we are going to sign. So in the Airport Authority Bill there is a reference to the Project Agreement. And in the Project Agreement, Schedule 29 to the Project Agreement, is a financial model. The financial model is referenced in Schedules 8 and 9 when it talks about the respons ibilities of the Government of Bermuda and the term ination, but we have no idea what these things are or what they represent. I think what is even more stark, Mr. Speaker , and I would appreciate your clarity after I finish speak-ing, is that it appears that the Government has told Members of the other place that they cannot opine on this because it is a 2 money Bill. Now, Mr. Speaker, the Constitution is very clear what makes a money Bill and what does not
2 RULING (see Speaker’s Ruling at page 629)
Bermuda House of Assembly make a money Bill. And I am aware, having consulted with former Speakers and former Deputy Speakers, that this does not constitute a money Bill. And I think in the exact same way of the cloud of darkness it is as though they do not want the system of government which we have to have full accountability. Why should the setting up of an Airport A uthority not be subject to scrutiny of the other place? It is an essential check and balance in our society. And I recognise the Members of the other place that are here today. And I hope that they will have the chance to debate and opine on this Bill, because it is i mportant. That is the nature of the democracy in which we exist. Now, Mr. Speaker, history will look upon all of us and judge all of us by what we do today and how we vote. And we heard about the Blue Ribbon Panel, Mr. Speaker, but I will say this: The Blue Ribbon Pan-el came to a conclusion that this Agreement was commercially sound. Mr. Speaker, there is a difference between commercially sound and sound for the people of Bermuda. There is a difference between commercially sound an d what is best for the students who right now cannot attend their school because it is infected with mould. There is a difference between commercially sound and the fact that we are cutting programmes around this country that can help to alleviate the soci al challenges and ills that we find in our society. So we can have commercially sound all we want, Mr. Speaker. But if we do not have a sound society it does not matter how many Blue Ribbon Panels or how many commercially sound agreements the Government may come up with, if it is not the right thing for the country, it will not end well for all of us, Mr. Speaker . Again, this is not about a building. This is about priorities. And it seems that to the One Berm uda Alliance a building is more important than the peo-ple of this country. Because we understand where this is coming from, we understand, you know, the need and the ferocity. We know that this is part of their election manifesto, and it is jobs at all costs no matter what the long- term financial consequences, no matter how many students you have to shaft, no matter how many social programmes we have to cut to make sure you afford it. We understand. But Mr. Speaker, are buildings more important than our people? Are they? The Fiscal Responsibility Panel said it best, Mr. Speaker , that we have to choose between a limited set of options and “dec isions [must] take into account not just whether the project has value for money . . . but whether the future fiscal costs involved represent the best possible use of limited budget resources.” This will cost us money, Mr. Speaker, and I will get to how much money it will cost us shortly. But is this the best use of our limited resources at this time? Because we know that we have plenty of schools in 2017 in this country that do not even have Wi-Fi. We know that scholarships have been cut. We know that at -risk programmes for at -risk youth have been cut. We know that there are people in our coun-try who are suffering. We understand enrolment has fallen at Bermuda College. I was speaking with som eone at the Department of Workforce Development the other day, and they said that they have to go out and find their own trainers to make sure that they train persons, Mr. Speaker . But this Government wants to tell us that they do not have money when they somehow can find $4 million to give to an associate of the Minister of Economic Development who has Bennett Jones and, you know, has this contract? I mean, Mr. Speaker , these are the type of things that the people note the difference—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. POINT OF ORDER [Impugning integrity]
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsThe Honourable Member is impugning, certainly my integrity, giving $4 million to an associate? He should withdraw that.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, right. I do not think he has given $4 million to — Hon. E. David Burt: Mr. Speaker, I said nothing about the Minister of Economic Development giving—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerBut I did not think — Hon. E. David Burt: But the fact of the matter is that if the Mi nister does not know Duncan Card, then I will happily take that back. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: You said “an associate” . . . you said an associate . …
But I did not think — Hon. E. David Burt: But the fact of the matter is that if the Mi nister does not know Duncan Card, then I will happily take that back.
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: You said “an associate” . . . you said an associate . . . you did not say —
Hon. E. David Burt: I will happily take that back. But, Mr. Speaker, the fact remains. This law firm got a nice pick —$4 million. And we know that Duncan Card has had business associations with part of the Gibbons’ empire. We know that. That is not a secret. So the fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that when you are stuck with these mixed messages —no, we cannot afford training; no, we cannot afford Bermuda College; no, we cannot afford this . . . yes, we can afford $4 million for a lawyer . . . that is all I am saying, Mr. Speaker. So we have to ask ourselves the question because, as I said, it is the priorities that are wrong, Mr. Speaker . It is the priorities that are wrong that will cause the Premier of this country to call 514 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly teachers “mischievous” when they do not want their kids in school with toxic mould, cancer -causing toxic mould, but they can find the money to pay consultants to give a Canadian company access to a $2.4 billion source of revenue, Mr. Speaker . Those are the priorities of the One Bermuda Alliance Government, Mr. Speaker. And there is a l egal term “fruit of the poisonous tree” . . . but if you start wrong, you end wrong, Mr. Speaker. And we all know that this project started wrong. We all know, Mr. Speaker , that the relationship between the Minister of Finance, as he declared in this House in 2015, the 25-year relationship that he had with principal of CIBC who was the one— it is 27 now (it was 25 then) . . . just saying, I read the Hansard. It was 25 then, it is 27 now. But the relationship that he had with the principal at CIBC and the fact that she was advising him, but not formally contracted, and the fact that she served as a back channel between CCC and Aecon, and we heard earlier today that they served as a broker for the meeting. Mr. Speaker, I am just saying it is nice work if you can get it. It is nice work if you happen to know the Minister of Finance, who says that he can bypass tendering rules. It is nice work if you know a company that can get some privatisation work around the cou ntry. It is nice work, Mr. Speaker . But I want to just go back to the thing about if you start wrong, you end wrong. Because at so many points in time we have seen the One Bermuda All iance act like the rules do not apply to them. We heard the Minister of Finance earlier talking about, Oh, F inancial Instructions don’t fit here. Yes, it does. Yes, it does. You just wanted to overrule them like you told CIBC. You could not. We heard earlier that there f inance rules do not apply to governments. Again, Mr. Speaker , it seems as though the rules do not apply to them. And at the end of the day, Mr. Speaker , honesty should rule. I have heard so many statements from the Minister of Finance. The Minister of Finance said that the figures that have been quoted by the Opposition are incorrect when the figures were pr ovided by his very own Ministry of Finance. They came to the Public Accounts Committee and they said the difference between the future P3 and where we are if we went with, as they call, the “Expensive Band Aid” option, is $19.4 million to the public purse. But the Minister said, Oh no, it’s only $6 [million]. Okay. You will say $6 [million] today, but the figures he presented to us say it is a whole lot more. Then we hear this whole thing about a Pu blic/Private Partnership, Mr. Speaker. It sounds more like a private profit partnership. Because if you are telling us that you do not want to tell us how much your private partner is making and if you are telling us that you have to get permission from your private partner to disclose information that is going to form part of a contract that will bind this country for 30 years, that you cannot share it with the Public A ccounts Committee or Members of Parliament, it does not really sound like that much of a fair partnership to me, Mr. Speaker . It sounds like we might be getting taken for a ride. And we have no control over this private compa-ny. We have an Airport Authority with some regulatory things. But at the end of the day their main task for the private company is to set the fees. And if they do not increase the fees, we have a contract that says the taxpayers have to make up the difference. That is what it is, Mr. Speaker. So they have gotten this deal and we are the ones here today —the MPs here t oday—that will tell them that it is okay. Now we will remember that in 2012 the OBA won an election on a campaign of transparency and accountability. But Mr. Speaker, it is a matter of public record that the Minister of Finance has misled this Parliament. And even his own Blue Ribbon Panel commented on some of the confusion which could have been caused by his public statements. Who can forget the details revealed . . . how he will fuzzy up the “no new debt” part? Fuzzy it up? He went ahead and said it. He fuzzied it up. “No new debt.” They still say it today. No new debt. He knew a developer was selected all along, but even today he still denies and tries to hide under a technicality that, Oh no, Aecon was not selected until we signed the Project Agreements. But he had meetings with Aecon well, well, well before that. Sorry, Mr. Speaker , the Airport Development Agreement was in August 2015, but the Minister met with Aecon in May of 2014— a long history, Mr. Speaker . He met with Aecon six months before he came to this Parliament and said that a contractor will be selected. But yet , we just forgive that. But yet, the Minister says, Oh no, I have been forthright all this time. No, he has not, Mr. Speaker. No he has not. He has not even been forthright with his own Accountant General. And when the Accountant General has to write you and say, I do not believe that I was given full and complete information, this should send the people of this country a signal. Then he goes and says, No contact with Aecon, but we know that his friend (as he said) was dealing with Aecon and arranged a meeting with all of them and she was acting on their behalf. He says, No privatisation, but yet the documents from Aecon prove otherwise and they say that (and I quote) the project “would be similar to the Cayman Islands . . . the intent is to privatise the airport operation.” (End quote). That was what was said, Mr. Speaker , it is in black and white. Yet, they will tell you that this is not privatis ation. During Question Period they said that it was approved by Cabinet, and that was disproven by the release that came out from the Public Access to I nformation from Canada. When he said it was ap-proved before, and then we find out that Cabinet did
Bermuda House of Assembly not give its approval until after the MOU announc ement. So, Mr. Speaker , I could go down the history of the misleading statements —
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Point of order.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Honourable Member . POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. That is patently not true. Cabinet has approved this process from the get go. I do not know where the information—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay, thank you— Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I can let him go on and on, but I cannot abide by that one.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, thank you. Carry on, MP Burt. Hon. E. David Burt: Mr. Speaker , we had that debate before, and I am not going to get into it today. But the fact of the matter is that the documents in the PATI request state that the Financial Secretary was …
Thank you, thank you. Carry on, MP Burt. Hon. E. David Burt: Mr. Speaker , we had that debate before, and I am not going to get into it today. But the fact of the matter is that the documents in the PATI request state that the Financial Secretary was on record that he was awaiting Cabinet approval. And I will be happy to pull up the People’s Campaign Report and show him the documents later, Mr. Speaker . But I move on, because I think there is a fundamental question here. And when we are talking about the overall thing, this overall . . . What does pr ivatisation look like? What does it mean? How does it affect us? I am reminded of a presidential candidate in the United States, Mr. Bernie Sanders, who spoke about a rigged system. And I want to talk about that a little bit, Mr. Speaker , because at its nature this deal is, as I said, a nice deal if you can get it —$2.4 billion in revenue— two bites of the cherry for Aecon. They make a profit off of the construction of the terminal, and then they make a profit off of the operation of the terminal. So Aecon Construction Company, they make a profit. And then Aecon uses its equity from somewhere else to invest in and to set up this concessionaire, and then they get the money off of that deal. But it is a private company making money off of a public asset because the Minister of Finance himself said, Oh, it’s our asset, it’s not theirs. So they will be making a healthy profit over a private asset. Mr. Speaker, this is just an example of how income inequality, not only Bermuda but globally, happens. It is how the rich get richer . Because if you happen to have access to $70 million and you happen to have connections with an investment bank and an investment banker that has a 27- year relationship with a Government Minister, everyone can get paid and make a big profit —Bennett Jones, $4 million; CIBC, at least $1.2 million; KPMG; Somers Construction . . . Somers Construction’s owner is on the board of Aecon. They are in the newspaper advertising for jobs. Are they going to be barred from getting work at the airport? Is there going to be some type of conflict of interest provision? I doubt it. What about the wonderful PR campaign that was run, whether it be Government resources putting out videos . . . with completely false information? Where you have people comment to me, It feels like I’m living in North Korea. Well sometimes it does, Mr. Speaker , because the Minister will say things that are not backed up by the facts. And we will get to some of them in a minute. But at the essence of this deal, Mr. Speaker , is why will the Minist er of Finance not tell us how much the private partner stands to make from this deal? Why won’t he? If our job here is to assess whether or not this is a good deal for the country, whether or not we are transferring risk from us to them, how is it that we are supposed to know whether or not it makes sense? And I have a few things to say before I get to the actual numbers, Mr. Speaker, because we have heard so much from the Minister of Finance. I mean his presentation was good, but one of the things that just shocked me was he spoke about debt and guarantees and how, Oh, we can’t afford to guarantee the airport like we guaranteed the hospital debt. Okay. All right. So the airport, port of entry, steady stream of traffic, steady stream of revenue, we know that it is going to generate stuff, seems relatively secure, able to structure itself and get an investment grade rating, we can do the same thing and guarantee it, yet the same Minister who says we cannot afford to guara ntee that will guarantee $160 [sic] for Morgan’s Point — a hugely speculative investment —with minimal equity contribution.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. E. David Burt: One hundred and sixty million. But we cannot afford to guarantee the airport? He is over here issuing guarantees, I hear, for the h otel in St. George’s (who, I understand, might be a little bit upset at what took place in this House last week, but that is for another day, Mr. Speaker). But we ca nnot guarantee a public asset? I heard the CEO of the Hospitals Board the other day talk about their improving financial perfor-mance. And they will get credit. But we operate that. So improving financial performance benefits the taxpayer. Improving financial performance at the new airport terminal on the OBA’s plan will benefit the C anadian shareholders of Aecon. Then we heard him speak about employment and how they are going to have 50 per cent more em516 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly ployees. I would put that I would have 50 per cent more employees as well in a business plan if I am tr ying to get access to $2.4 billion in revenue. But I know that after I signed that contract and the airport is mine, I can bust the union. I can say I am going to make some efficiency redundancies, streamline operations to increase the profits, and guess what, Mr. Speaker , if they do that, none of that benefits the people of Bermuda. None of it at all because they have a regu-lated revenue stream that everything is modelled off of . . . everything. So if they manage to reduce expenses, it does not help us, it just boosts their profits, Mr. Speaker . Then we spoke about good governance earl ier and I said it, Mr. Speaker. The fact is that if this very project was started under the Premier’s draft Code of Conduct for Project Management and Pr ocurement, it would have broken the law. It is simple. As I said, there is no doubt the reason why the draft Code of Conduct has become the actual Code of Conduct is because the way that this airport deal was handled would never fall under it, Mr. Speaker. And the Good Governance Act [2012] would apply and certain Ministers of Government may be liable. But, no Code of Practice, do what you want. And then there is the Blue Ribbon Panel, Mr. Speaker . And I will echo the Minister of Finance and I will thank them for their work and their contribution. I deal with a lot of those persons on a regular basis and I have a tremendous amount of respect for all of them. But, as I said publicly before, Mr. Speaker , if you design the project and if you [ask] people, Have I designed a project to meet what I designed it for? And you ask them to opine on that, then there is no sur-prise that when you announce the panel you say, I have no doubt that they will agree with me, that they are going to agree with you because you set it up for that result to happen, Mr. Speaker . But a s we said before, there is a difference between commercial soundness and sound and right for the people of Bermuda. And finally, Mr. Speaker , there are very few protections, from what I see, against corruption and collusion. And there are things that I said earlier be-cause we have seen periods before where we said that, you know, we have seen them recently; the Gov-ernment said that if you are a former Minister you cannot participate in this industry. Is that going to happen here? Could there be possible e ntanglements between financial empires and what is going on with this project? Does the Good Governance Act apply to Aecon when they run the airport? Do they have to put out their subcontracts to tender or can they just award them to whoever they want? I mean, it is their money, it is their project, they get to pick the people who are going to have the leases, they get to pick the people who are going to get the contracts. Before, those things would fall under the Good Governance Act and the Department of Airport Authority. What happens now? The Canadian company gets to choose who wins. That is the way it works, Mr. Speaker . So it would be nice to see if there is any protection, but we do not know. And then the final one, Mr. Speaker, which I find most amazing, is this conversation about no pr ivatisation. Well, we already spoke about the fact that Aecon believes it is privatisation. And there are numerous types of things that speak about privatisation. But I will go from the Library of Economics and Liberty and read, “ 3another major form of privatisation is the granting of a long- term franchise or concession under which the private sector finances, builds and operates a major infrastructure project.” That is what this is here, Mr. Speaker . So the Minister . . . I am not going to say he is confused. I am going to say the Minister is making a political argument. But he knows that this is the privat-isation of the airport operation because when he compared it to the hospital he conveniently said, The hospital is the same minus the operation part. Well, the operation part, Mr. Speaker, is a pretty big thing because we hear him talking about, you know, The BHB . . . they never disclose. W e’ve given more disclosure. The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that the BHB contract, number one, went out to tender, internationally acclaimed. Number two, Mr. Speaker , there was no revenue diversion from the BHB, like this. And number three, because there was no revenue diversion, no Bill needed to come to Parliament. So when you come here there are different standards. The BHB already had the power to enter into the agreement which it entered into, Mr. Speaker . That is why there is a difference, and the Minister of Finance knows it. But let us talk about the finances, Mr. Speaker, because the Minister of Finance said that the $18 million figure that is being discussed is not acc urate. But, Mr. Speaker , the documents that were pr ovided by his very own Public Accounts Committee show that the difference between the two scenarios of a future P3, where we retain $50 million of expenses a year, and the future status quo, where we make reno-vations to our existing terminal, means that the public purse is better off to a tune of $19.4 million a year, Mr. Speaker . Those are the facts. They came from him. So when election time comes around and Members of this House go knocking on doors and a student complains that their school does not have Wi - Fi, or the young person complains that they could not get access to a training programme, the decision was made in this House that we have the money to spend an extra $19.4 million, Mr. Speaker . But let us go to something else which is extraordinarily misleading, Mr. Speaker, and it is this
3 “The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics,” Privatization, by Robert W. Poole Jr.
Bermuda House of Assembly thing where the Minister of Finance talks about this 50/50 profit share. Now, I have spent some time; put together a nice big spread sheet, Mr. Speaker. I feel like I have done a little bit of work. I hope the Inde-pendent Senators have it.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. David Burt: Do you have a copy, Mr. Speaker? Okay. So now, Mr. Speaker, this has come from the Government’s own figures. And if we look at the top line it is this thing called the Base Case Financial Model, something that the Minister of Finance has spoken about. The Base Case Financial Model. And if you look at the Base Case Financial Model, Mr. Speaker, over the years of the agreement if traffic increases at the rate that the Government says it will increase inside of this Agreement and infl ation goes at that rate, Aecon will receive in total, at least —and I say at least, Mr. Speaker, because the full financial model has not been disclosed, so I am going with the most conservative estimate so I am not accused of being a “number bomber,” although I was accused of being a number bomber when I spoke about over $2 billion of revenue and this shows $2 billion of revenue from the Government’s own fi gures—but, Mr. Speaker, this shows that Aecon will get dividends of $356 million over the term of the deal. And guess how much the taxpayers get, Mr. Speaker—zero. Zero. But it gets better, Mr. Speaker, because we get zero while they get all this money, but we are still stuck with $586 million of expenses (which you will see at the very bottom) which, again, come from the Government’s own figures provided by CIBC a week ago. Now, Mr. Speaker , that means that the difference between the dividends that we forfeit to a Canadian company and the Government expenses repr esents a difference of $942 million, or an average of $31 million a year. But let us just say, because, Mr. Speaker , we got this 50/50 revenue share and the Minister talks about, you know, once we pay the $69 million we will go 50/50 after that, it will be a good deal . . . so, I did an estimate to say what if the traffic is 5 per cent higher than what the Minister of Finance says it will be. What if it increases by 5 per cent more each year? Under that scenario, Mr. Speaker, Aecon’s total dividends would be $400 million over 30 years. And our total dividends over 30 years, Mr. Speaker , will be $42 [million]. So we will get $1.4 million a year and they will get $13 million a year. And when we take into account this —it only starts after they get back their $69 million—do you know what the split ends up being, Mr. Speaker , if the revenue is . . . you know, traffic is 5 per cent higher? They get 89 per cent of the profits and we get 11 [per cent]. The difference, Mr. Speaker, [is] $945 million because we still have $586 million worth of expenses. But let us just say, Mr. Speaker, that things go really well and traffic increases 10 per cent above expectations, 10 per cent. So you know this is a good thing because we want traffic to increase, we want more tourists to be coming to Bermuda. Here is what happens under that scenario, Mr. Speaker. Aecon will extract $460 million in dividends over the 30- year term, and the people of Bermuda will get $136 [mil-lion]. When you take away the initial portion, Mr. Speaker , you know, that nice 50/50 that we were talking about, they get 75 per cent, we get 25 per cent. A huge amount of profit that they get, Mr. Speaker . If we do a good job of increasing tourism, they get more money. But guess what, Mr. Speaker, we are still stuck with the $586 million of expenses. We still have to pay these expenses. And we heard the Minister of Finance talking about a house earlier. The fact of the matter is that we are still paying for the house, Mr. Speaker . We are paying the mortgage, we are paying the maintenance, we are paying everything because we still have bil ls. So we have given away the source of revenue. We have given it away! Given away the source of rev enue, and yet we still have all these expenses. Mr. Speaker, where is the money for that $586 million going to come from? Where is it going to come from? It can only come from three places, Mr. Speaker , increasing taxes, increasing borrowing, or cutting programmes and investments in our people. There are no other options, Mr. Speaker . These are the numbers. They are without dispute. So when we hear the Members get up and talk about their 50/50 profit share arrangement and they will go and brag and boast about how this is such a great deal, it is not that good, Mr. Speaker . It is not that good, because they continue to make more and more and more. As I said, Mr. Speaker , if at the very base case over a 30- year time horizon we are able to i ncrease traffic to the level which the Minister of Finance estimates that we will, and fees go up by 2 per cent every year, we do not get a dime. Not one, Mr. Speaker . But th is is the good deal that he has given us. This is what he calls the best deal that we can get. That, Mr. Speaker, I do not believe is som ething that Members of this House should accept. B ecause when I look at the difference, Mr. Speaker , on just the very basic level of the $19 million a year that we could have between going through with this airport privatisation or extending the life of our existing term inal, that represents a real difference of $19.4 million a year. [With] $19.4 million a year, Mr. Speaker , we could reduce our deficit, we could probably build two primary schools a year to replace the primary schools in this country which are, with the exception of Pr ospect, all older buildings than the airport. And instead 518 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly of some people just spending two hours on their way in and out, our school children spend 200 days in those schools, Mr. Speaker . We could make Bermuda College free again to reverse the trend of declining enrolment that we have seen under the One Bermuda Alliance at the Bermuda College. We should want to increase enro lment, not decrease it. We could invest in our at -risk youth. We could invest in green energy. We could . . . I see the Members from constituenc ies 1 and 2 are not in the Chamber. We could build a Causeway with $19 million a year, Mr. Speaker . The Causeway, was part of the original plan, but it is not in this one b ecause, guess where that money is going, Mr. Speaker. It is going into the pockets of Aecon and their 100 per cent Canadian shareholders, Mr. Speaker . As I said, it is good work if you can get it. Mr. Speaker, some things are just funny about this deal, which is, you know, something we do not talk about a lot because we have not. But are you aware, Mr. Speaker, that when this deal goes through the Government is going to start paying rent to Aecon? I understand that the mail facility is being told that they have to go or find somewhere else, that there are other facilities that have to go somewhere else, and that we are going to be paying rent to a company that is not even going to pay taxes and they are going to make $350 million, Mr. Speaker . But this is what the Minister calls the best deal. This is what he feels we should do. The same Minister who . . . and when we had a conversation before we met with you a couple of weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, I said I do not envy his task because it is not easy. But I know that the Minister of Finance would love to have $20 million more in his budget each year. I am certain. But he is giving it away to Canada, Mr. Speaker . I mentioned it earlier, Mr. Speaker, but I had to bring it up again because we have this privatised entity Bermuda Skyport that decides who gets the contracts. Understand there are buildings . . . because if they are saying the Government has to move out of the mail processing facility, how much is that going to cost us if we have to move that? That is not account-ed for in the Financial Memorandum. I did not hear the Minister mention in his brief that we have to move out of buildings which we previously owned because we are handing them over to a private company that is going to start charging us rent that we might not be able to afford. So who replaces them, Mr. Speaker ? Who r eplaces them? Who chooses who gets to go there? Who is the one who decides who gets to go in that building? It is not us. But that is what privatisation looks like, and that is why this whole thing about a public/private partnership . . . no, Mr. Speaker . I would say that a better example of a public/private partner-ship would be what we have at the hospital where they build and they maintain, but we operate. Mr. Speaker, I will make this admission here. As far as this work has gone and as much as has gone on, I would not have an issue with Aecon buil ding this airport terminal, because we spent a lot of money on plans, a whole lot of money on consultants for friends and associates of the Ministers of the Gov-ernment —a whole lot of money. And something has to be done. But, Mr. Speaker, we could build the same terminal and have a maintenance model in the same way we do at the hospital. We could operate it our-selves and keep the profit here, Mr. Speaker . That is the difference. That is a better option. That is a better plan. And if the Minister of Finance says, Oh, but then we’ll have to guarantee the borrowing, well, guarantee it, Minister of Finance, because you guaranteed it for Morgan’s Point. Then there is this other thing, Mr. Speaker , about the commercial deals. And I know that this is something because . . . were you aware, Mr. Speaker , that in the Project Agreement Aecon gets to submit a commercial model to the Airport Authority? And in this commercial model that they submit to the Airport A uthority, which the revenue that is earned from that . . . we do not get any of it, just to be clear. But in this commercial model from the Airport Authority the Ai rport Authority does not get to say yay or nay. The Air-port Authority has no right to approve the commercial model. They just have to submit and they can com-ment, but the Agreement says Aecon can do what they like. And do you know what else it gives them the permission to do, Mr. Speaker? It gives them the permission to . . . and I am going to read this list slowly to the members of the audience who may be listening or the members of the public who may be listening. It gives them the right to build on our land that we own, remember, because the Minister keeps saying we own it , but we are leasing it to them and we cannot say what they can do with it, and we have to pay them rent, but it is still our land, yet we are paying to rent our own land. Mr. Speaker, does that make sense to you? But they have the right to build hotels, restaurants, meeting facilities, business centres, exhibition centres, convention centres, conference venues, c asinos, marinas, sports and recreational facilities, trade fairs, miniature golf facilities, driving ranges, theme parks, supermarkets, malls, educational and training facilities, sports and/or entertainment facilities, art ga lleries, museums, cinemas, planetariums, space ports, real estate developments, energy generation, banks and exchanges, and shopping malls. That is the list of commercial items which they can put on our land, the land that they are kind of kicking us off of because they get to set the rents.
[Inaudibl e interjection and laughter ]
Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. E. David Burt: That might fall under sporting facilities. And, Mr. Speaker, this is another part of the comedy —no cargo shed. We know that we have to do something about a cargo shed.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberNo kidding. Hon. E. David Burt: No cargo shed in the deal. But Aecon is incentivised to find a private partner to help to build the cargo shed. And I can assure you, Mr. Speaker , it is not going to be part of the regulated revenues. So that is …
No kidding. Hon. E. David Burt: No cargo shed in the deal. But Aecon is incentivised to find a private partner to help to build the cargo shed. And I can assure you, Mr. Speaker , it is not going to be part of the regulated revenues. So that is just going to fall into more profit for Aecon and less for the people of this country. And the other thing which I mentioned before, Mr. Speaker, and this is the big comedy of this deal — no bridge. We keep hearing the Minister talk about hurricanes, and what are we going to do about hurricanes. And if a hurricane comes and knocks down our airport, what are we going to do? Well, if it knocks down the bridge that goes to the airport, Mr. Speaker , it does not matter how pretty your airport is, you are not going to be able to get to it. So it probably makes sense to handle them both. But no. No plan for the Causeway, Mr. Speaker . There was a plan at the beginning because it was in the original deal, but Aecon could not make it work in their $350 million of profit. They could not make it work so we get shafted. But we are supposed to accept that this is the best deal, Mr. Speaker ? Now, Mr. Speaker, I have 11 minutes?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerTen forty -nine. Hon. E. David Burt: Ten forty -nine? We are right on time, Mr. Speaker . So at the end of the day, Mr. Speaker , we know . . . let me go one more place, Mr. Speaker , because when we talk about the “best deal” …
Ten forty -nine. Hon. E. David Burt: Ten forty -nine? We are right on time, Mr. Speaker . So at the end of the day, Mr. Speaker , we know . . . let me go one more place, Mr. Speaker , because when we talk about the “best deal” the cha llenge and the outrage that members of this communi-ty have is the fact that we feel that we are exporting profits, which should belong to the people of this coun try, to a Canadian company. That is the basis of it. And it is something that is even mentioned, even though kind of hidden, inside of the Blue Ribbon Panel Report because they said: “We do however consider it open for discussion that if there is an opportunity for the equity component of the deal to be partially ac-cessible to the people of Bermuda as a whole, that should be considered.” So when the Minister has a chance to r espond at the end, or the Minister of Economic Development (who I am sure will speak after me), I hope that they can address that because Aecon has to keep 35 per cent, but what about the other 65 per cent? If they are going to push through with this deal to export all of these profits to this private company, Mr. Speaker —a huge stream of dividends where we get none—should there, in some way, shape or form be a way for Bermudians to participate? Should there be a way for the Bermuda Government to participate? We are talking about . . . these people raised . . . how much did they raise? Sixty -nine million dollars is all they are putting in. The Minister raised $50 mi llion three years ago in a day. It was over -subscribed in Bermuda. But we could not ask the people of Ber-muda if they wanted to come up with $69 million to put part of equity here, locally, and guarantee the debt so we can build the exact same air terminal with the plans that are provided by Aecon? And Aecon can even build it if they want, Mr. Speaker . But we would keep the dividends. Those are the options that we have to consider, Mr. Speaker . Those are the options that have to be consi dered by the Honourable Member for constituency 1 and the Honourable Member for constituency 2, who sit in the East End of St. George’s, who have to go over two bridges in disrepair to get to their constituencies, who have infrastructure challenges in their co nstituenc ies and who have . . . Honourable Member from constituency 1, you will have a chance to speak. But the truth of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that when the Honourable Member goes knocking on doors next time and people ask him what about his promise to do something about the Causeway, he is going to have to tell them, I gave that money away to Canada, I’m sorry. That is what will happen.
[Inaudible interjections]
[Gavel]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, you will have a chance to speak. Hon. E. David Burt: The same will happen to the Honourable Member for constituency 2. Who can forget the poignant videos of the young Government Whip, with her child on her lap, talking about the debt that the country has? Who …
Honourable Member, you will have a chance to speak. Hon. E. David Burt: The same will happen to the Honourable Member for constituency 2. Who can forget the poignant videos of the young Government Whip, with her child on her lap, talking about the debt that the country has? Who could forget? Emotional and heart -tugging. But yet, in the Base Case Financial Model, Mr. Speaker, Aecon gets $356 million in dividends, we pay out $586 million in expenses. That leaves a difference of $942 million. If she is worried about the debt, then maybe she should worry about a solution which will impact Government finances less . . . if she is worried about the debt. And then there is the Honourable Member from constituency 4. She also has an issue with the bridge. But what about this Act giving the Airport A uthority right to compulsorily purchase lands which may be able to be used? I happen to believe that most of that airport land is in her constituency . How does she feel about that? How will she explain that to her constituents? How will she explain the fact that her co n520 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly stituents who . . . you know, how does she explain that, Mr. Speaker ? [Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. David Burt: Yes, she says, I’m sorry, can’t do anything about that. Gave away the responsibility. [What about] the Member for constituency 14, Mr. Speaker? Now that Honourable Member represents Cedar Park, and Cedar Park experienced a loss recently and a young man was murdered. Now, I went to the wake and I hugged the mother who spoke passionately about, If we can have a march for all the young men who have died . . . here is the thing, Mr. Speaker . If we do not do something about our social ills there will be more young men dying. But if we do not have the resources to invest, then we are not go-ing to be able to provide the education and training and retooling that is necessary to fix those social ills that affect, largely, the black community. But guess what, Mr. Speaker ? If we have $586 million expenses and no revenue, Glen Smith is going to have to knock on doors and say, Sorry, there’s no money for retraining. And when he runs out of jobs to give at Auto Solutions, he might have a challenge. I wonder what the Member for constituency 20 says, Head of the Audit Committee, sitting on the Pu blic Accounts Committee, not getting access to doc uments in violation of Financial Instructions? How does she feel, Mr. Speaker ? What about the Member for constituency 28 and also for constituency 25? They are in Warwick. What are they going to tell their students at Purvis and at Tatem? What are they going to say to them when their schools have issues that they cannot address because the Government committed to having $586 million expenses while giving away its revenue, Mr. Speaker ? How is that going to be fixed? There is no amount of Facebook that the Member from constit uency 28 can do to fix a $586 million hole in the bud get, Mr. Speaker ? There is none. [Inaudible in terjection] Hon. E. David Burt: One love will not fix that. And then we have the Honourable Member for constituency 30 who talks about how she does not like party politics all the time, and she used to be the Ju nior Minister of Education. How is she going to explain to the parents in her constituency or the young kids that are looking for work that want training and educ ational opportunities that, I gave that money away to a Canadian company , Mr. Speaker? That is the question which we have to address today, Mr. Speaker . That is what this is about. The question is about whether or not we accept what the Minister of Finance has given us, shrouded in secrecy, not being able to tell how much money this private partner is giving, but knowing that they are going to make a significant amount before we touch a penny, while we are stuck with $586 million of expenses, or are we going to tell the Government, Get us a better deal? Look for another way. Extend your balance sheet for the airport to make sure that you retain the operation of our public asset in the exact same way that you extended the balance sheet of the Gover nment to protect someone’s private investment at Mor-gan’s Point, Mr. Speaker. That is what we should be telling the Minister of Finance. That is what we should be telling the One Bermuda Alliance Government. That is what the Backbenchers should be saying i nside of their caucus to say, You know what? I don’t want to tell my constituen ts that I can’t afford fo r them to have training programmes. I don’t want to tell them that we are going to have to cut back on their benefits because we are giving away our money to Canada, Mr. Speaker . A vote No today, Mr. Speaker , does not kill this deal. Aecon is not going to walk away. They have far too much invested. But what a No vote does, Mr. Speaker , is tell this Government that they cannot behave in a fashion that is as arrogant as what they have gone about this entire process shrouded in s ecrecy with and expect the Parliament to rubber stamp it without the full details. A vote No, Mr. Speaker, will remind the co nstituents of this country that we care about what matters to them more than what we care about the profits and dividends that will go to a Canadian corporat ion. A vote No, Mr. Speaker , means that we think the work which we have to do for our young people, the ones that are struggling in this country, those that are economically dislocated, who do not have hope, who right now feel hopeless and do not feel as though they can participate in this economy, Mr. Speaker , it gives them a chance to think that, Hey, maybe, maybe the people on that hill actually care about Bermudians more than they care about Canadians. A vote No today will tell the people of this country that we believe that our schools and our kids’ futures are more important than a building that we will build. Thank you, Mr. Speaker .
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member . Any other Honourable Member care to speak? The Chair w ill recognise now the Minister for Economic Development, Dr. Grant Gibbons. You have the floor.
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsThank you, Mr. Speaker . I had forgotten how easy it is to be in Oppos ition and to make all kinds of claims, to make all kinds Bermuda House of Assembly of speculation, to throw out suggestions which are half-baked, and to basically feel very smug about it. Mr. …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker . I had forgotten how easy it is to be in Oppos ition and to make all kinds of claims, to make all kinds
Bermuda House of Assembly of speculation, to throw out suggestions which are half-baked, and to basically feel very smug about it. Mr. Speaker, I think we have . . . I guess the best way to put it is, I am surprised that we are being lectured about arrogance after what I just heard for the last hour or so. It is quite extraordinary. Let me start by saying that I am reminded of a quote by the great Louis Armstrong “Satchmo,” Mr. Speaker , some people just don’t know, but you can’t tell them. And what we have seen over the last —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIs your [microphone] on, Dr. Gibbons?
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsYou are not picking it up? What we have seen over the last year or so has been a very disturbing set of inaccuracies and mistruths coming from the Honourable Member who speaks for Finance, the Opposition Leader on that side. Let me just remind those listening about the conclusions …
You are not picking it up? What we have seen over the last year or so has been a very disturbing set of inaccuracies and mistruths coming from the Honourable Member who speaks for Finance, the Opposition Leader on that side. Let me just remind those listening about the conclusions of the Blue Ribbon Panel. It says: “In summary, we have found that this transaction is commercially sound and reasonable, likely to meet the Government’s stated objectives of long term sustaina-bility, increased traffic volume and revenue, while effectively providing for the structural needs of the ai rport. We have also found” —and this is important — “that its terms are within the parameters for similar P3 Airport projects and in some cases this project ex-ceeds those norms positively.” Mr. Speaker, we have had not only the Blue Ribbon Panel, which has obviously made our job a lot easier in terms of essentially refuting a lot of the. . . I guess the best way to put it would be “factual inacc uracies” (as the Blue Ribbon Panel put it) out there. But we have also had a number of others who clearly have reviewed this project over a period of time. We have had the UK Government who has ind icated that all of the Entrustment provisions have been fulfilled. We have had an Airports Council International with over 1,850 airport members who have referred to it as “creative and resourceful.” And we have had the independent firm of Steer Davies Gleave who have said, quite categorically: “Based on our review of the circumstances, analysis of the strategic and financial case, and estimate of the economic impacts, the Government’s chosen option” (which is the Government to Government [G2G] approach) “represents value for money when compared to the two Public Sector Comparators.”(That is the band aid approach and the design, build, operate, and maintain approach. ) “The G2G option provides the better combination of meet-ing strategic objectives and minimi sing financial costs to the Government. ” So, Mr. Speaker, the point is still out there. After all of these effectively independent sources who have said that this project and the proposal that is be-fore us today is good value for money, is a good deal for Bermuda, the Opposition Leader continues to simply say, and I think it can only be for the sake of politics, that this is not a good deal, this is a bad deal for Bermuda. I do not think, Mr. Speaker, that we are at a point where this is about the airport anymore. I think this is really an effort to try and essentially mislead the public, an effort to try and effectively tell those t hat— who really do not have a good basis for making these comparisons and analyses —an effort to try and essentially destabilise our approach to this whole thing. Mr. Speaker, it is interesting in a way because . . . and I find it really disturbing actually, that the Ho nourable Member in his position would put out some of the numbers that he was throwing out there like the $2.4 billion of revenue when he knows full well, I hope, that that is not the way to analyse a project of this sort. The Blue Ribbon Panel was very clear when they talked about some of the misrepresentations, the numbers that were put out there, the $810 million or the $1.4 million of hidden costs. They said “The numbers of both $810 million and $1.4 million” (which were supported by the Opposition) “are both based upon assumptions that are (1)” —
Hon. E. David Burt: Point of order, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Honourable Member . POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. E. David Burt: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. Our figures came from the figures that were presented by the Government. The items which you are talking about came from a private cit izen. He should put the ones on …
Yes, Honourable Member .
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Hon. E. David Burt: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. Our figures came from the figures that were presented by the Government. The items which you are talking about came from a private cit izen. He should put the ones on us on us and the pr ivate citizen on the private citizen.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Hon. E. David Burt: Our figures came from the Mini stry of Finance.
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsThank you, Mr. Speaker . I think the issue is (and I am going to get to this in a minute) when we look at a comparable deal, which is the hospital deal, the idea is that when you look at a project of this sort, what you really want …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker . I think the issue is (and I am going to get to this in a minute) when we look at a comparable deal, which is the hospital deal, the idea is that when you look at a project of this sort, what you really want to do is to look at the net present value of different ap-proaches. You want to look at how these things are assessed. And I think the approach that has been 522 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly taken up to this point, throwing out large sums of money in terms of lost revenue or profits and the rest of it, is not the way, as the Blue Ribbon Panel says, that independent experts would evaluate a project of this sort. In fact, it does not properly consider both sides of the picture for both costs and revenues. And I think we can get into that a little bit more when we get further down the road here. It is difficult to really get a sense of it, but it sounds as though the Opposition is really suggesting that the approach here should be the band aid ap-proach, which is the try and save money in terms of the overall project by simply putting in sufficient capital expenditure over the next few years to try and essentially keep the airport limping along on its current path. What we have heard very clearly from the Blue Ri bbon Panel and certainly others is that of the three o ptions considered—and this is from the Blue Ribbon Panel —and compared against one another, the cheapest option is to repair and renovate. That is what we are hearing, I believe, from the Opposition. However, they go on to say, after extensive analysis, that the best value for money comes from the Government’s proposed option. And that is the Government to Government option, which is the approach design, build, finance, and maintain option. Now, I think it would be very useful at this stage to have a look at what some of the objectives were for this particular proposal. And those are set out very clearly in the report from Steer Davies Gleave. And I think it is useful here to keep these in mind because the Government was pretty clear in terms of how it wanted to approach it. And these objectives are as follows, with your permission, Mr. Speaker : • to create an environmentally sustainable, eff icient and cost -effective airport (consuming less water and energy); • to stimulate the Bermudian economy and maximise employment; • the project does not require any third- party Government financial guarantees (and obv iously that is really important from what we have heard in terms of increasing our debt and increasing our cost of borrowing, which obviously we have got enough challenges with right now); • the project also does not require any Go vernment capital investment and minimal ongo-ing expenditures; • the project transfers commercial and financial risks of the airport operations to the private sector; • the project involves the airport operations being undertaken and managed by internationa lly respected experts (that is the project company Skyport); • the project ensures the airport operator is m otivated to market and promote Bermuda as a destination for tourists and business trave llers; • that the project maintains Government control of critical airport infrastructure (such as Air Traffic Control, Fire and Rescue Emergency response); • the project ensures the airport’s operations are overseen by a dedicated regulatory a uthority (which is the point of the legislation that is before us today, the Bermuda Airport A uthority) and a management contract including “market standard” terms and conditions, i ncluding risk management rights and remedial protections; • that the project also increases the long- term commercial opportunities for Bermudian owned businesses at the airport, such as r etail, food and beverage, and other valueadded services; • that there is an agreed “fixed price/design specific” airport construction guarantee from a AAA credit rated entity (that is CCC) to build the airport “on time, on spec, and on budget”; • it avoids any sale, assignment or transfer of Bermudian land, buildings or real estate; and • it provides protection to the Government of Bermuda form the airport operator achieving excessive profits (allowing Bermuda’s direct participation in the upside).
Those are the basic objectives that the Government considered when it was approaching this particular deal. So, one of the things that I think might be very useful here, because it is an interesting comparison, is to compare this particular project with the design, build, finance and maintain project at King Edward. That was also a 30- year contract. The amount of money was about the same, which was $290 mi llion for the hospital (that was construction costs plus the design and demolition). So the costs against the $302 million are very comparable. In that particular case there was what was referred to as a substantial completion payment, which was a $40 million upfront payment. And that is pretty standard in a design, build, finance and maintain project. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Point of clarification, Mr. Speaker.
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsThe Honourable Member had his turn. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Or point of order, point of order.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, but what is your — Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: I believe the Honourable Member —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou cannot be . . . it has got to be e ither one. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Well, point of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, well next time do not take that route. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Okay, Mr. Speaker, thanks. I was trying to be—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGo ahead, go ahead. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: I think the Honourable Member, I do not know if he misintently mislead the House, but he just said, I believe, that the prices were comparable when he said that the airport is $302 [mi llion] …
Go ahead, go ahead.
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: I think the Honourable Member, I do not know if he misintently mislead the House, but he just said, I believe, that the prices were comparable when he said that the airport is $302 [mi llion] compared to $289 [million], whereas we know that the number that we have is $267 [million].
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay, okay, Honourable Member, yes. You will have an opportunity to get up and . . . and— Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Maybe he—
The SpeakerThe Speaker—and . . . you will be able to have . . .when you get a chance to speak, anything that he says you will have a chance to shut down if necessary or if you find it necessary.
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsThank you, Mr. Speaker. I thought I was very clear. I said the $290 [million] included construction costs plus design and demolition. [Inaudible interjection]
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsYes, that is right, exactly . . . exactly — [Inaudible interjection] The Hon. Dr . E. Grant Gibbons: It is $302 [million] or $304 [million]. It is roughly in that category. So, anyway, the point is that $290 [million or] $300 [million] it is all in the same ballpark. …
Yes, that is right, exactly . . . exactly — [Inaudible interjection] The Hon. Dr . E. Grant Gibbons: It is $302 [million] or $304 [million]. It is roughly in that category. So, anyway, the point is that $290 [million or] $300 [million] it is all in the same ballpark. So the costs are somewhat comparable. But with the hospital , the Government, or I should say, in the first instance the hospital had to come up with the $40 million upfront payment, a sub-stantial completion payment, once the project was done by Paget Health [Services]. Of that, only about $24 million was actually raised and $16 million by t he Hospital’s Charitable Trust, and $16 million actually had to be defunded or the project would have defaul ted. Now here is where it gets interesting, Mr. Speaker. The annual payment to Paget Health [Services] was some $26 million. But that, interesting ly enough, was just for the repayment of the loan and the construction. That did not include the operating expenses of some $14 million annually, which at the time was never budgeted. In fact, believe it or not, the additional operating expenses for the hospital for the Acute Care Wing were never budgeted. So, in fact, the $26 million was the payment every year to Paget Health [Services]. And if we take these numbers and multiply them out, what that works out to be is some $780 million over the course of t he 30 years. If you add the $40 million to that, you are over $800 million in terms of the payment to Paget Health [Services], which is primarily an overseas ent ity. It is a local company, but the people behind it are primarily overseas. So you have to ask the question, Where was the outcry at the time over that amount of money be-ing paid out, which obviously could have been used, if the argument was the same, could have been used for other spending on other things at the time? I think the point here, Mr. Speaker, is that when you start to multiply these numbers out they start to look very, very large. But the fact of the matter is that what the hospital was getting and what Berm uda was getting here at the time was a new Acute Care Wing. What the Government is getting in this partic ular case is a new airport. So you would expect a fair amount of money to be paid out to be able to afford that. In point of fact, every year the hospital is pa ying the $26 million to Paget Health [Services], plus another $14 million simply to operate the Acute Care Wing. So when you look at that over a period of some 30 years, you are looking at something on the order of $1.2 billion. My point, Mr. Speaker, is that it is very easy, as the Opposition Leader has done, to multiply o ut these numbers on an annual basis over a long period of time. But that is not the way that most of these pr ojects should be analysed, and not the way that fina ncial people in this field would really have a look at this. The other issue which I think is very important here is that the Bermuda Government actually has to guarantee the loan on the hospital. On this particular deal because of the financial condition we are in with our debt, the project —the Government to Government project —is set up in such a w ay that the Government has no liability for the debt at all. Now, we have heard a lot of comment from the Opposition Leader about something which is done in the dark of night and shrouded in secrecy. And I 524 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly think it is very useful to look back at that time. Mr. Speaker, you were in the House. I was in the House as well. But when you look at the degree of transpar-ency on this particular project (which is the airport pr oject), it is extraordinary in comparison to the amount of transparency at the time. I have here in my hands the extent of the transparency on the hospital— the Acute Care Wing project. It is a two and a half page Ministerial Stat ement from the Honourable Member who just got to his feet a couple of minutes ago, who was the Minister of Health at the time. Two and a half pages was the ex-tent of the disclosure at the time when this $290 mi llion P3 project went through in 2010—that is when the Statement relates to. In the Statement the only thing that is referred to at the time was the construction cost estimate of $260 million. It did not include the design. It did not include any of the demolition costs at all. There is not much more in here, apart from the fact that it is a 30year design, build and maintain, and that basically that there were three bid teams that were shortlisted. They talk about a lump sum payment at the beginning of it, and then that was pretty much it in terms of the actual disclosure. It took a year later for parliamentary questions to get some of the additional details out, but even then, Mr. Speaker, as my honourable colleague, the Minister of Finance has said, the actual Project Agreement was heavily redacted and kept locked up at the hospital. So when you compare two and a half pages of disclosure at the time—and I am happy to table this (it has got some notes on it from me at the time) —with the more than one thousand pages of information that has gone out there, which has allowed, in fact, the Opposition Leader to come up with . . . I mean, if it is so essentially shrouded in secrecy, we have many more numbers being thrown out here by the Oppos ition Leader . . . much of these projections have been debunked so far by the Blue Ribbon Panel. It is hard to even compare the two. So the only word I can come up with, Mr. Speaker , is when you compare the transparency at the time with what we are seeing now, the best word I can come up with is “hypocrisy,” Mr. Speaker . I think it is quite, quite extraordinary in terms of accusing this Government of being shrouded in s ecrecy and lacking transparency. And as I said, I am quite happy to table this. It is unbelievable the amount of information that was not provided at that particular time. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important, again, just to sort of reinforce some of the credentials of some of the people who have looked at it. The Steer Davies Gleave [firm], which for some people may be sort of an eye- glazing thing, is a firm which has been in bus iness (and these are the ones that did the Value for Money Assessment) since about 1978. They are an independent consultancy. They work worldwide in the transport sector and they have essentially been i nvolved in everything from the transport planning and design for Canary Wharf to trying to resurrect the i ssues with the Eurotunnel, transport planning for the 2012 Olympics, and transport plans for the World Cup 2014 in Brazil. In essence, Mr. Speaker, they are a world -class company that has effectively said that the Government’s approach to this, which is Government to Government, in terms of the various options looked at, is the best possible deal. I think it is easy to think about this as well, it is simply a company providing a value for money. But a company like Steer Davies Gleave . . . actually, its reputation depends on fair assessments of this sort. This is the business they are in. And if they were to essentially be seen as providing something which was inaccurate or putting their firm behind something which was considered to be exaggerated or inappr opriate, then their reputation and credibility would be at stake. This kind of analysis —value for money or fair value assessment —goes on all the time in this area. And I think it is important for people out there to u nderstand what we are really looking at here in terms of these particular analyses, which have been essentially done to provide the kind of assurance that this is the best possible way for the Government to approach this deal. So it comes down to very, very simple issues. And those [issues] are that there is no balance sheet exposure for Government in this. We have seen these value for money analyses which have been done. The actual upside, which the Government has access to, once the equity has been paid back, allows Gover nment to participate in the upside. There are a lot of things here, Mr. Speaker, which I think are really quite positive in terms of this deal. The other thing which I think it is important to talk about briefly is the fact that it would probably have been very risky, as my honourable colleague the Min-ister of F inance has said, and difficult to actually put this out to tender. This is different from the hospital project in a number of ways. A number of people from the Blue Ribbon Panel to Steer Davies Gleave have all commented on the fact that this is probably not a terribly attractive project in terms of the size and the throughput of this airport. Any passenger throughput under about a mi llion passengers per year is very marginal in terms of the kind of attractiveness to outside contractors and construction firms. And a number of reports refer to the fact that the Cayman deal did not get off the ground, the Bahamas had some difficulty (even though their throughput is quite a bit larger), but we are sort of on the margin here. So the approach which was taken, which was to do a negotiated deal, allowed the Government, ef-fectively, to work very carefully to customise a project which fits for Bermuda. And I can say that in a number
Bermuda House of Assembly of areas, and in particular in the energy area, the Government was able to go back and say, because we are responsible for the energy costs (and as you will see, at least in the Blue Ribbon Panel Report and the Steer Davies Gleave [report] this is not unusual in terms of having energy retained by the lessor), in this case (which is the Government) we were able to go back and essentially recommend further design changes to make the airport even more energy eff icient, because as we all know the cost of electricity in Bermuda is extremely high, relatively speaking, som ething that we are trying to work down. There was also an opportunity to look at other design elements and to effectively right -size this so it worked for Bermuda. So when you compare a project which was some $514 million going back a number of years, which was the Opposition’s (the Government at the time) best shot at it, with something which is clos-er to about $300 million all -in, I think we have done a pretty good job here in terms of working both with our partners in Aecon and also with some of the consul tants out there to produce something which really should work very well for Bermuda. I think most people at this point feel that they simply want to get on with it. I think the airport is the way in to Bermuda, it is on our doorstep. And it is cer-tainly the way out, the last thing that visitors —both business and leisure —will remember. Clearly it is an embarrassment at this particular point. We have heard from any number of sources that this is a good deal, and given the constraints that Government is facing it is probably a really excellent deal. And I think the Mi nister of Finance really should be congratulated (and his team) for what they have come up with here. I touched on the issue of transparency. It has been extraordinary. In my close to 25 years in the House I have never seen a deal which has been so analysed by so many people and given so much scr utiny, and essentially it has come through with flying colours. So, Mr. Speaker , we will hear a lot of numbers thrown out there. We have heard a lot of numbers from the Opposition Leader, but suffice it to say those that are experts in the area and even our own panel internally have considered this to be a good deal for Bermuda, one of the best deals we could have gotten under the circumstances that we have in hand. And we have even been congratulated by the Airports Council International, who decided—
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant Gibbons—decided in their own terms that it was both a creative and resourceful thing. So, Mr. Speaker , I think it is clear that the O pposition Leader has done his best over quite a long period of time to throw out all sorts of numbers. Those have been debunked, …
—decided in their own terms that it was both a creative and resourceful thing. So, Mr. Speaker , I think it is clear that the O pposition Leader has done his best over quite a long period of time to throw out all sorts of numbers. Those have been debunked, by and large, by those who have analysed the deal. And I think he is essentially, at this point, certainly running out of steam in terms of credibility in terms of how you would analyse a deal of this sort when contrasted with international experts in this area. I have certainly been looking at this for a number of years now. And I think, given the circumstances we are in, it fulfils all of Bermuda’s needs. And to suggest somehow that these funds are interchangeable with other projects, like schools and the rest of it . . . this is a very specific one- off deal. It takes a lot of the pressure off of Government, both in terms of debt and in terms of any additional payments. It is funded by the users. I think it makes really good sense, Mr. Speaker , and with that I will take my seat. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you. Thank you very much, Dr. Gibbons. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 6, MP Wayne Furbert. You have the floor. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . I thought for a while we— ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER HOUSE VISITOR
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust before you start as well, I just want to recognise Senator Wilkerson, who is in the Gallery. Sorry, Member. [Airport Authority Bill 2017, Second Reading, debate continuing] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . As I was about to say, I thought for a while that we …
Just before you start as well, I just want to recognise Senator Wilkerson, who is in the Gallery. Sorry, Member. [Airport Authority Bill 2017, Second Reading, debate continuing] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . As I was about to say, I thought for a while that we were debating the hospital. And I think som etimes the Government has been trying to justify this development or this project based on the hospital. Now, I am not going to get into the debate on the hos-pital tonight, but all I ca n say to them . . . they never themselves. They have to think about it, the question that took place about the airport. It was never . . . they were the Opposition. They had the right to ask all the questions they wanted at that time and they failed at that time to get the information that they wanted. Mr. Speaker, the decision we are about to make today is very important. As my honourable col-league has said, it is going to not only affect our chi ldren or the Bermudians that are born now, but those who wil l be the unborn Bermudians. Mr. Speaker, the Minister has mentioned se veral times that the airport has reached its useful life. One thing is for sure, Mr. Speaker, the OBA political party has reached their useful life. And the people of Bermuda will very soon knock down that building. 526 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Speaker, I do not understand when they talk about the useful life because . . . you know, I u nderstand. But the problem is here. They tell me that we will be handed an airport terminal in 30 years. And the airport terminal is supposed to have not completed its useful life at that time. Okay. All right. It makes sense to me, because you said it will not have reached its useful life. But yet, our departure section at the airport right now is only 28 years old. The arrival section at the airport is only 20 years old. So, I do not know how they say that this new airport, when given back to us, will not have reached its useful life, but yet these two entities, these two parts of the airport that exist right now, have reached i t. It just does not make sense, Mr. Speaker . I know they mentioned about a building down there that I think was built in the 1940s. Well, take that one down. And I think that is the area heading out to the cargo shed, in that direction. But those two secti ons that we built in 1985 and the other one that was built, I believe in 1996, in the arrival section, are just 20 years old. So are we going to just knock down buildings every time they reach 30 years? There are many buildings in Bermuda that . . . I mean, St. Peter’s Church. Can you imagine, Mr. Speaker , that we will say that that has reached its useful life? Or my house which is 125 years old (part of it)? Or the Honourable Member Grant Gibbons’ house is probably over 50 years old, or all the other Members’ houses around here. We do not just go around knocking buildings down, despite it has got wooden floors, as I heard a gentleman say that some termite may be in some of the floors or the ceiling or the roof. We do not just go knocking . . . we work on those situations, Mr. Speaker. So, Mr. Speaker —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMember? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, carry on, Dr. Gibbons. POINT OF INFORMATION
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsI think it is publicly known that some of the existing airport will be r etained. It is not all going to be knocked down.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Mr. Speaker , that just speaks to the point. Here is a problem, Mr. Speaker. Every child of a shareholder of Aecon will benefit by the decision we make today for the next 30 years. The shareholders’ children will benefit by the decision that …
Thank you.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Mr. Speaker , that just speaks to the point. Here is a problem, Mr. Speaker. Every child of a shareholder of Aecon will benefit by the decision we make today for the next 30 years. The shareholders’ children will benefit by the decision that we make here today. But also, Mr. Speaker , the decision that we make here today will have an impact on our children over the next 30 years. And I say, Mr. Speaker , it is not in a positive direction. Mr. Speaker, no political party was talking about an airport in 2012. No one was talking about it in their manifesto, We’re gonna build a new airport — not one political party. We talked about many other things that I will mention in a few minutes. Despite the Honourable Ewart Brown in 2008 talking about an air-port, I do not think it went too much further than that — $514 million was and is a lot of money. That is why I find it ironic that Steer Davies Gleave compares $256 million construction cost with $512 [million] as two o ptions. Why would you do that? Why were they not compared with a tendering process that can build the same siz e? If I recall, the airport that was suggested by the honourable former Premier Ewart Brown, Mi nister of Transport, was much larger. You cannot be comparing that with this particular project nowadays that we are talking about. So when you look at the two options, of course you are going to say the option for the $256 or $260 million is better. Mr. Speaker, the OBA Government promised . . . not an airport. If you do not mind me just reading what they promised, Mr. Speaker, they promised to create 2,000 jobs . . . the Honourable former Premier Craig Cannonier. They promised a turnaround plan with two -track strategy. One of the two tracks that they promised was to eliminate wasteful Government spending and reduce the national debt. Now that is the concern I hav e. Mr. Speaker, we are talking about taking f uture cash flow from out of the Government’s pocket and giving it to Aecon. I do not understand how the Government can sit there . . . and the Honourable Member Grant Gibbons from constituency 22 says that ther e is no balance sheet impact. Mr. Speaker, if I gave . . . I am sorry, if the Honourable Grant Gibbons gave me his pay cheque for the next 30 years, I am set for life. And I am not talking about a pay cheque that he gets from this Honourable House, but a pay cheque he gets from somewhere else. And the only way the Honourable Member Grant Gibbons can sustain his livelihood and the way he has been living for the last umpteen years, is to either go out and find a future job, another job, or raise debt. And this is what we are saying about this airpor t. We are saying that we are giving up $35 mi llion. He says, Well, how did I get $35 million? It is roughly $19 million that the Government’s airport is making, another $25 million or more coming out of the passenger tax —we are giving that away as a cash item, Mr. Speaker, that currently was sitting on our balance sheet and comes into cash every year. And so you are trying to tell me that is not going to have an impact on my cash flow? It is not having an impact on
Bermuda House of Assembly our cash? How can the Government say that? So the Minister only has, and I heard him very clearly, say early on that the payment is now going to be higher than our health care budget.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: No, I think the annual pa yments.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Debt service, debt service. It is going to be higher than the healthcare. If that is the case, Mr. Speaker , why? I am assuming the Minister is probably going to have to go borrow some money come in the next couple of weeks when we are talking about the budget. So, if I had to borrow $100 million, if I had kept my $25 million, I would only have to borrow $75 million. That is my point, Mr. Speaker, it does have an impact on the balance sheet. It does have an impact on our future generation. So I do not understand how the Minister and the Backbenchers and the Cabinet can sit there and say there is no impact. Somebody has to pay the price, and that price is either the taxpayers’ or we are going to . . . well, either way, we are going to borro w it and we will still pay more. And the Minister has al-ready confirmed that the debt service is going up. Mr. Speaker, do you remember this ad that says, This Bermuda baby will be born owing over $35,000? This is the ad produced by the One Berm uda [Alli ance] in 2012. Mr. Speaker, that was four years ago. Four years ago they said that, and the mother has her hand on her stomach and says, This Bermuda baby will be born owing over $35,000. That baby is now four years old . . . four years old and I heard that baby, four years old, went to his mother who is now pregnant again with his sister, and said, Mother, how much will my sister owe now? And do you know what the mother said? Sixty -seven thousand dollars. That was 2012, the little boy was not even born, but he went to his mother after he was four years old and said, Mother, how much will my sister owe? And the mother said, I’m sorry to tell you this, but your sister will now owe $67,000. That child in 30 years’ time will be 34 years old. What do you think we will owe then, unless we get hold of our debt? And I heard the Honourable Mi nister talking about debt; our debt is out of control. If you remember, Mr. Speaker, they had some graphs in 2012 showing with the continuation of the PLP the debt went this way, and by them taking over the debt went this way. I do not know what they were prophesying, but the debt went this way for them. And literally it went from $1.4 up to roughly $2.5 . . . $2.7 [billion] right now. And they are going to blame the PLP Government for increasing the debt after four years by $1 billion, and they are coming back again? I am saying that we have to get hold of our debt situ ation because somebody is going to pay for it. It is go-ing to be this generation and the generation to come. That is why I am saying that the way that the financial deal [is going] for the airport is wrong. Roughly, $2.5 billion over the next 30 years, part of it can go on our debt service, on our down payment to pay off our debt. That is why we are fighting on thi s side. Mr. Speaker, it is sad to say that somebody on this side will probably be cutting the ribbon of an airport that we really do not want. They say in four years’ time, the airport will be built in 36 to 40 months, and unfortunately we are going to be down there smi ling . . . . click, click, click, knowing that we are also having some problems. This side, come December . . . next February [we] will have to produce a budget for a debt that this Government has increased even more. That is why we are fighting so hard because we do not want to have that situation around our neck. We do not want the people to be facing something that we know is wrong. But the only people that can stop this situation right now are the Members on that side. And I can tell you r ight now I would remind them in the budget . . . well, none of them has seen the budget, I will remind them when the Honourable Minister presents his budget in the next two or three weeks there is proba-bly going to be a debt increase in borrowing. There has to be unless they make a significant cut som ewhere and they raise revenue significantly, then it has to have an impact on all other aspects. That is why we are fighting so hard —for our children today and our children in the future. Mr. Speaker, the Government is heading in the wrong direction. Mr. Speaker, I heard my honourable colleagues . . . let me just say this to you, in 2012 the interest on debt in the Sinking Fund was $112 million. Do you know what it is now, Mr. Speaker ? [It is] $187 million. And they are blaming me? It went up some $75 million by that Government. I told the Mini ster when he first came in in 2013, Cut the expenses . . . those unfunded . . . those positions in Government that were being funded by the Government, by the Minister of F inance. And, you know, once the Minister got hold of that money, they spent it. I remember when we were there, the Honourable Paula Cox said, Cut all positions down to flat zero . . . to bare, and then also cut expenses. They kept it going for three years . . . almost $20 [million], $30 million. I may have the number wrong, but the Honourable Minister knows that we were funding positions that were never going to be filled. And, of course, at the end of the day he knows that Minister then spends it, or they find som ething to spend it on . . . $4 million on that law firm. Mr. Speaker, our debt service is now 18.8 per cent. Debt -to-revenue ratio is 249 per cent. That is why the highest expenditure will be our debt service come this March, February, whenever the budget will be read out. That is shocking, no matter what they 528 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly promise. It is going to be shocking. Well, we should not be shocked. But then April 1st the money that should be coming through departure tax to the Consolidated Fund is being floated off somewhere to the shareholders’ children over there in Canada. And you wonder why we have a problem on this side. And I am saying to the Honourable . . . Mr. Speaker , that the Members on that side have been hoodwinked. They are blindly being led by the Minister of Finance in this particular situation. I mean, I just could not imagine, with no one thinking about a budg-et about an airport in 2012, how in the world did this come in front of the Honourable Minister? He was not laying in his bed and said, Oh, the Lord gave me a vision. I believe somebody walked up to him, called him on the phone, sent him an e- mail, and said, I have an idea for you. And I challenge him that that is not true. Somebody said to him through e- mail, phone, walked up to him and touched him on the back while he was wandering through the Canadian airport and said, Hey, I have an idea for you. He probably ran back to his colleagues and said, Hey, I’ve got this great idea, we can increase employment, we can get more staff . . . we can get up to our 2,000. But so far they have lost 2,000, now they have got [to get] 4,000, and they will not get it back between now and the election. So they got this crazy idea. They ran with it, they do not know how to let go. It is like a bulldog holding onto it, and even knowing that the numbers that are going to have an impact on this country are going to impact us now, but also in the future. We cannot support that, Mr. Speaker . And it is absolutely wrong . . . the direction that this Government is heading this country. I mean, when we get back in som etime this year they may not even have put . . . they may have put the foundation in, I do not know whether they will be finished by then, but they will not be no-where up [near] to a wall [bottom] plate. Mr. Speaker, you remember there was an ad with the Honourable Patricia Gordon- Pamplin and the Honourable Sylvan Richards that talked about creat-ing the Office of the Contractor General, independent of Government, to oversee Government’s projects from tendering to completion to ensure that policies are strictly enforced and to identify unfair practices or offence conduct. I can tell you right now if they had put that in place this project would not be here right now. It would not be here. But, you know, this is, as the Minister says, you know, the Government are ha ving . . . this House is not having anything to do with this. I am kind of paraphrasing, It’s my idea and we’re gonna push it, and you guys don’t understand this stuff. Mr. Speaker, in the MOU [ memorandum of understanding] in November last year the Minister said that having carefully considered all its options . . . what options did they consider by November? There were no other options on the table at the time. The Honourable Minister misled this House. It was not until another project . . . I said Steer Davies Gleave talked about these three options. He misled this House. The proposed transaction would not have any burden on the Bermuda Treasury . Not true. This was No vember. It has an impact on our . . . Well then, if it does not, I want to know where my . . . When I read that budget statement in March I want you to show me the line item where it says “departure tax.” There is going to be a decrease, but they all lump it in one with depar-ture tax from . . . or passenger tax they called it, the cruise and also the air terminal. There is going to be a decrease. I want to know where my money is, if there is no impact. So we will lose excessive cash flow from the airport for the next 30 years. And my honourable colleague and my Leader said earlier that the Fiscal R esponsibility Panel said in 2015: “the loss of airport revenues net of operating costs . . . is probably best regarded as a form of expenditure . . . In any event it is a fiscal cost that, given the fiscal situation, would need to be offset by other fiscal measures.”
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThat is from where, from who? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: The Fiscal Responsibility Panel Report 2015.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: “So the decisions should take into account not just whether the project has value for money . . . but whether the future fiscal costs involved represent the best possible use of limited budget resources.” And it said the same thing in 2016, the same …
Okay.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: “So the decisions should take into account not just whether the project has value for money . . . but whether the future fiscal costs involved represent the best possible use of limited budget resources.” And it said the same thing in 2016, the same thing. The Minister went on to say there would be a Canadian infrastructure developer (this is in his MOU) that CCC would conduct its own due diligence to be satisfied the Canadian developer has the technical . . .blah, blah, blah. . . financial. Mr. Speaker, we all know now that CCC did not do any due diligence, other than Aecon who found CCC. We know that now. Aecon found CCC based on all the releases done by . . . as a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker , by the e- mails. I think there was a release by one of Aecon’s lawyers, I think it was, that said on the basis . . .let me just read that, Mr. Speaker . It said something on the line . . . just give me one minute, Mr. Speaker . It says that C CC’s legal counsel is on record stating that the procurement method used is not transparent. It also said, CCC only took steps to carry out due diligence in relation to Aecon in response to requests that it justify the selection of Aecon as the subcontractor. As a matter of fact, it was almost like . . . fill out the form . . . fill out the form and we will take you on. The Government’s external lawyer was concerned that CCC was not taking the lead in the neg oBermuda House of Assembly tiation with the Bermuda Government. And this became the issue of contract contention between CCC and Aecon. Mr. Speaker, what I am saying here is som ething went wrong at the very beginning. I said som eone, I believe, approached the Minister . . . well, he can deny it, I do not think he . . . because it does not make sense, why would the Minister of Finance and not the former Minister of Transport come up with the idea? He came back and probably told his colleagues, let’s have a little chat. I can probably get more . . . some things done around here. We are off target, Mr. Speaker, and if we do not get back on track, this country, as I said before, will have some major concerns facing it in the future. The Honourable Minister, and I consider him a friend, I believe [he] means well. He does, I remember v ery clearly when he said that he will bring down the debt. Well, we have not . . . we have not. But yet you are going to take away the very thing that we need to help us bring down the debt? I am not saying that we do not need a new airport in the future. I am questioning whether we need it right now. There are many people in Bermuda right now who would like a new car, they would like a new house, they would like something, even some people like some clothes, but they just cannot afford it. Do we need to . . . situation . . . and pay what we can afford? Or do we go out there and subject our children to something that we cannot . . . that is not going come our way? That is the question we have got to ask ourselves because those, to me, are some ser ious concerns for us and for our people. Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Minister said something about creating employment. Well, the other day, PAC had the Department of Airport Operation Manager in and he said he can take on 12 more staff right now —they are under stress—right now. The 50 per cent that he talks about, we can increase 50 per cent tomorrow, if it is in the budget that the Honourable Minister is talking about. We looked at the numbers for renovating and everybody talked about the leak in the roof, it was about $5 million to get the roof all fixed up at the airport. The rest had to do with the conveyor belt, X -ray machine, more of it was equipment. So why can we not live within our means for now? And so when things do improve, Mr. Speaker , we are there. We have learned our mistake. Why can you not learn your mistake? Well, he said, the Honourable Minister said, We haven’t learned our mi stake. Well, Mr. Speaker, when he sits on this side as the Financial Opposition spokesman for Finance, he will understand it. We will get it right. We will get it right because we have learned our lesson, but they have not learned their lesson. And how . . . in all this type of thing the time is click, tick, tick, tick . . . it is ticking away. That is why I said their useful life is up. It is just a matter of time and everyone on that side knows it. It is just a matter of transferring from one side to another, and that will take place. But we cannot . . . I am very concerned that we are going to face a situation, as I said before, that is going to take this country in a . . . and then we are going to have to find ways to either raise revenue much higher, because you only do it two ways —raise more revenue. . . to find a balanced budget, or reduce expenditures. There are some very serious concerns over this, Mr. Speaker , and the Minister, I do not believe, he is being . . . is hard- headed being unparli amentary? Is that unparliamentary? [Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I know it kind of gets through . . . he is hard-h eaded, Mr. Speaker, and he is not li stening. And all the reports of the Blue Ribbon [Panel] are good friends of mine . . . good friends of mine. As a matter of fact, one of them revealed to me before he was on the Blue Ribbon Committee that he supported the project. I do not know how independent that one person was, I am not calling names. He knows, So, Wayne, why are you objecting? I am not going to call his name, Mr. Speaker. Just one of them and I think some others have called and said they had no pro blem. The Minister said it very clearly, he said, Oh, I knew they were going to support me. He probably knew what their decision was anyway. But these are honourable . . . I really like these guys, they are very good guys and ladies. As a matter of fact, Caroline Foulger did some work for us when I was the Minister of Tourism, so I respect them. But going into their decisions many of those guys’ minds . . . some of them may have already been made up. And based on the terms of reference by the Minister restric ting them to, really . . . you could not move. I could have supported the terms of reference the Minister had put us in because if you are locked in a box, how are you going to get out? I am locked here so I am going to agree with what is in that box. But when he had allowed them to open the span and get a better view of the outside world and the impact that it was going to have on us, that was never asked. As I said before, the other Committee for Value for Money . . . Steer Davies Gleave looked at three options: (1) We stay as we were and do some renovations for $184 million. And in the report, Mr. Speaker , they assumed that there would be no increase in tour-ists. Huh? How can you say that? How can you say that there will be no increase in tourists based on the airport? Can you imagine telling BTA that because we are going to keep the airport the way it is, you are not getting any more tourists? Then the second one was the $500 million [option], and then, of course, the $265 million one. And then there have been other committees. Interestingly enough, most of those reports that have been written out there have been done by the same group that gave him financial advice—CIBC, his friend 530 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly that has been there for 27 years, KPMG —they were all given the financial analysis, all stuck on the go vernment’s website. Most of them came from the same group. What is so independent about that group? It is probably the same person that approached him about the airport. Was that true, Mr. Minister? Was the same person who gave you advice on CIBC the one that approached you on the airport? Oh, never mind. You have the right to remain silent.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I said, was the person who was—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member , you . . . you know — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Okay, I am sorry.
The SpeakerThe Speaker—you are not having a conversation with the — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes, I understand, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes. All I am saying is that somewhere along the line som ebody who has probably been involved from the very beginning to the very end in this project . . . from the very beginning to the very end. Giving the Minister advice from …
Yes. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes. All I am saying is that somewhere along the line som ebody who has probably been involved from the very beginning to the very end in this project . . . from the very beginning to the very end. Giving the Minister advice from the very be-ginning about a project at the airport to the very end is all I was saying. I am just asking, is it possible? Is it possible? And if the Minister is silent, maybe that is the truth, and hence why we should have concerns.
[Inaudible interjection]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI did not know . . . I was not looking at the . . . sorry, I did not give you first. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Mr. Speaker , I will sit down. But as I said before, this unborn child in 2012 owed $35,000 and now the sister …
I did not know . . . I was not looking at the . . . sorry, I did not give you first.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Mr. Speaker , I will sit down. But as I said before, this unborn child in 2012 owed $35,000 and now the sister of this child owes $67,000 and [it is] climbing. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will recognise the Honourable and Learned Member from constituency 31, MP Shawn Crockwell. You have the floor.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you , Mr. Speaker , and good evening to you. The Speaker: Thank you, good evening to you.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellMr. Speaker, I would like to start by first of all expressing my appreciation to the people of this community for their role in not contri buting to a repeat of what occurred on the 2 nd of December, thanking those who called for calm, and we saw that in …
Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by first of all expressing my appreciation to the people of this community for their role in not contri buting to a repeat of what occurred on the 2 nd of December, thanking those who called for calm, and we saw that in the leadership from both sides of the House, Mr. Speaker. And I think that we all should be pleased with the fact that we were able to come here today and do our business as per normal, despite the fact that there has been a great deal of tension and acrimony around this particular issue. And it is interesting because we have seen a lot of discussion. I think that this has been information overload in terms of . . . because it is very hard to wrap your mind around an issue when there are so many divergent opinions. So we have had a great of discussion on this over a few years. There has been some drama, Mr. Speaker , and some drama that was unnecessary and unfortunate. There has been a lot of hype and I have to say that I feel that today has been a bit anticlimactic to a certain degree. I used to always tease the Minister of Finance and say that —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIt is early yet, Honourable Member . [Laughter]
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellAnd things can change as it gets later at night, Mr. Speaker . But I used to always tease the Minister of Finance and say that, you know, this is like a heavyweight bout. He and the Shadow Minister (now Opposition Leader) have been going at it for some time. …
And things can change as it gets later at night, Mr. Speaker . But I used to always tease the Minister of Finance and say that, you know, this is like a heavyweight bout. He and the Shadow Minister (now Opposition Leader) have been going at it for some time. And it was entertaining at times in the House to see two good debaters, both of them certainly entrenched in their positions, go at it. And so I said when the day comes, you can sell tickets to the event. But it has been somewhat anticlimactic like the Pacquiao vs Mayweather fight, Mr. Speaker . We wai ted for it for so long and when it came it was a disappointment. But like you said, it may be in the early rounds still. But, Mr. Speaker , maybe it has toned down a bit because there has been a change, I believe, in the view in relation to this project. And I do not know if it is because of the recent leaking of the roof that we saw when we had that torrential rain a few weeks ago, it particularly struck me because we had a visiting swimming team here—and I have said this before, my daughter is involved with BASA and swimming and so I am kept up to date with those events —and they were departing Bermuda on that day when literally
Bermuda House of Assembly there was a deluge coming from the ceiling of our ai rport. And our visitors were there experiencing that. I do not know . . . I have to congratulate the Minister. You know, the Government quite often gets berated and rightfully so at times for its poor comm unication, but I think that when you see a poll result change from 75 per cent against to 62 per cent in f avour, it is a significant transition. And, I mean, we can analyse the questions and all of that, I mean, people analyse the original question and we can analyse today’s ques tion, but it is a significant swing. And so there has been, for whatever reason, there has been a change in the people’s view of it, Mr. Speaker, albeit there is oppos ition in the community. What we have to ask ourselves and how I approach this project —and let me say, Mr. Speaker , I was a Member of the Government, I was the Minister of Transport at the time when phases 1 and 2 were approved, so I still feel a sense of collective respons ibility because I was a part of those decisions, and I made those decisions with the abundance of infor-mation that was before me at the time—but I have always approached this issue by asking myself two questions. The first question, the most important ques tion, and the Honourable Member who just took his seat opined on it, and that is, Do we need a new airport? You have to start there. And when I was the Minister of Transport, I formed a very good relatio nship with the General Manager of Airport Operations who is a very dedicated and astute individual. I spent quite a bit of time at the airport. I was given many tours of the airport. I saw the problem of leaking roofs, I saw the problems —very serious problems —of overflowing sewage and termite infestation there, Mr. Speaker . The place was falling apart. It was falling apart. And all of us . . . in fact, I have travelled and I will be travelling with prominent PLP members, and they will look at me and say, Minister, we need a new airport. And we know that. And the former administr ation knew that, and that is why they undertook to try and find a solution to replace the airport. But I was convinced, as the Minister of Transport, that this asset needed to be replaced, in addition to the risks that we had there because of its placement. Every time there is a major hurricane (and we are experiencing more serious and more frequent hurricanes) that particular building is at serious risk. So I was convinced that we needed a new airport, not a renovation, not a patch job, we needed a new ai rport. Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that there were significant attempts to try to find a solution. I attended a few meetings where we had accounting profession-als there with all sorts of professionals in the room, trying to figure out how we can get investment or how we can come up with a solution to be able to build a new airport. And as the former administration exper i-enced during their time, and as the Department of Ai rport Operations and myself as Minister, as we were experiencing, we could not find a solution. The Gov-ernment did not have the money at hand and the Government could not afford to borrow the money. And there was no one stepping up to do it themselves. So we had a quandary, but there were significant efforts. I do not want people to think that out of the blue someone all of a sudden, the Minister of Finance said, Let’s build an airport. It was on the top of the agenda, particularly for the General Manager of Airport Oper ations, to try and figure out a way to replace that asset. I believe that the majority of Bermudians, particularly those who utilise the airport (and many of us do), came to the same conclusion that we needed a new airport. So, once you answer that question Yes, then you have to go to, How? And the Minister of Finance . . . I remember the day clearly when he came to Ca binet beaming that he had this great proposal and that he believed that there was a solution there, a viable solution to be able to build the airport. And it was complex. The financing of this particular proposal is very complex. Let me say, Mr. Speaker, I am not an economist. I do not profess to be an economist to figure out all the numbers and try to be able to say whether or not this is going to have this impact or not. I defer to the Opposition Leader; I defer to the Minister of F inance; I defer to Minister Gordon- Pamplin and others who are trained in those areas. And it is interesting because I believe you need to be an economist to be able to wrap your mind around this. But even the economists have disagreed on this. It is like a strangest experience. I will s it down and I will read an article from Larry Burchall and I will think, Okay, he makes sense. And then I will go and speak to somebody else, and they make sense. It has been like one of the most confusing processes that we have been through. You will hear David Burt make a very passionate speech in the House. And then you would be like, Wow, okay. And then the Minister of Finance would get up and he will make a passionate speech in the House, and you think everyone sounds good. You know, I had Craig Mayor call me and he bent my ear for an hour on the phone going through his view on this. So, the average person who is trying to wrap his mind around this (and when it comes to economics that includes me), Mr. Speaker, it can cloud your mind to try and ascertain whether or not this is a good deal or not. One of the biggest issues though, and I think this was part of the failing in the beginning for the Government, is that there was . . . because there was a vacuum, the type of information that was taking root in the community was so way off base and it became entrenched. And I had people stopping me complai ning that Aecon will still be getting revenues from the 532 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly airport 30 years after the lease had expired. And that is an extraordinary exaggeration of the facts. A nd this was an intelligent person. He said, Somebody told [me], it was either Larry Burchall, l or I do know , whether it was Chris Furbert or it was Tweed, I heard it from somebody that Aecon will be earning revenues decades after. And I said, Well, that’s not the case. When the lease expires Aecon is gone. Everything comes back to the Government —revenues, asset and all. And they said, Are you sure, Crockwell? And I said, Yes, I’m pretty sure. But there was a lot of misinformation out there that caused unnecessary disquiet. And so when you have economists disagreeing and when you have pol iticians disagreeing, you can understand why this has been the political hot potato that it has been. And that is why I am very glad that the Minister went through the Blue Ribbon Panel process. But before I get to that, let me just say, I do not know how many people appreciate, but this was in the Royal Gazette, Mr. Speaker , on the 1 st of December 2016. The reporter is Mr. Jonathan Bell (who I believe is in the Gallery today so he can correct me if necessary (maybe later on). But he did an article, Mr. Speaker, and he was quoting a Ms. Angela Gittens, who is the Director of Airports Council International [ACI World]. Now why this stood out to me is I happened to meet Ms. Gittens when I was in South Africa at the conference there. And let me tell you, Mr. Speaker , this lady is a superstar in this industry. We were in this large area, a meeting room, hundreds of people were there. It was packed, with industry professionals, leaders of industry, airline CEOs, airport general managers and CEOs from all around the world, Mini sters, Premiers. And when this woman was called to the stage the people erupted and gave her a standing ovation. Aaron Adderley was trying to get me to meet her, and I had to wait in a long line for half an hour because everyone was there trying to press her flesh and have a few moments of her time. And I got there, she was engaging, and the speech she gave was very compelling. And when I saw that she was being interviewed —an international industry leader —this is what she said, with your permission, Mr. Speaker . I thought it was very balanced. She said: “ Due diligence appears to have been done, and the provisions of the agreement, from what we can see, are the kinds of provisions that we promote. ” Talking about this particular proposal: “ This one was very interesting to read. . . . I don’t know if we have had this government -to-government structure. It’s creative and resourceful. Having a PPP isn’t unu-sual, but the structure is. ” She said, “In any transaction there is a risk of things not working out . . . it’s important that everyone understands things can go wrong in 30 years. The fact that it is countenanced is very important.” “The report very much provided evidence that the objective that Bermuda has set in advance could be met by selecting this scenario.. . .there are two i mportant points that the report highlights which make you understand the level of risk that the investor takes.” And she was referring to the Value for Money Report. Now, I think it is important just to pause here because we have heard a great deal about how this deal is going to . . . you know, it is such a great windfall for the developer. We do not hear much talk about how much risk is involved with the developer. One of the reasons why the former administration could not get anyone to take this project, and one of the re asons why (when I first became the Minister) there were no takers for this project, is because it is highly risky. And we will not know what would have happened if it was put out to tender, Mr. Speaker, but based on my information, based on what I understand, there would not have been many people lining up to take over an airport, to build and take on an ai rport that has the level of traffic that we have. These individuals do airports like [Toronto] Pearson, like air-ports in New York, and Heathrow. . . large airports where you are guaranteed millions of people coming through. We had a situation, Mr. Speaker, and I am glad to say that we are seeing some positive trends going forward, but at the time we had a situation where we were, and the Opposition consistently r eminded us, that we had tourism numbers going south, Mr. Speaker, we lost numerous business individuals in this country —they left —so friends and businessmen were not travelling here like they were before. We had a reduced traffic and we were looking at development and investment here. So where you see safeguards to make the deal more palatable, that is just commerc ial efficacy . . . it is commercial efficacy. But we quite often do not appreciate the risk. In fact, Ms. Gittens went on to say, “This particular investor is taking great risk . . . typically, they wouldn’t look at an airport of this size. I think it’s because of this government -to-government feature. ” So when I saw that, because at the time I was trying to weigh up all the pros and cons myself, when I saw someone of this stature, someone this highly r espected have these views . . . I mean, no one can say she is OBA, PLP, or anything else. This person was an international giant in this industry opining on this deal. I believe the reporter may have asked her, I do not know the genesis of that, but her opinion made a significant impact on my view. And I remember calling the General Manager of the airport and saying, Wow, this is the lady we met a few months ago, et cetera, and I was quite pleased to see that. So now let us go onto the Blue Ribbon Panel, Mr. Speaker, and I do not plan on using up all my time because I believe that the Blue Ribbon Panel Report
Bermuda House of Assembly says it all. And I want to start off by looking at the members of the Panel, and the Honourable Member who just took his seat also touched on this. He was questioning the independence. But then he says that he holds them in high regard. And this is a stellar panel, Mr. Speaker : Malcolm Butterfield, Anthony Joaquin, Barclay Simmons, Caroline Foulger, Craig Simmons, and Gil Tucker. These are all leaders in their respective fields, Mr. Speaker . And it is interesting because, you know, I have been around politics for a while. I remember when the Honourable Member who just took his seat was the Opposition Leader and I was the Chairman and I remember at times talking about the calibre of a Malcolm Butterfield, how we would have loved to have gotten him involved in politics and in leadership. Gil Tucker —the number of times that I have heard that he could have been a great Premier for this country, Mr. Speaker . I do not know Anthony Joaquin personally, I have met him at functions, but everyone that speaks of him speaks very highly of him as well. I just recently met Ms. Foulger, interestingly enough, it was at a pr otest rally, she was just there walking through and I was there and the Honourable Member who just took his seat introduced me to her. I knew her name, but I had never met her, and he sang her praises in the introduction. Barclay Simmons is a friend of mine — brilliant man— we need to celebrate the Barclay Si mmonses of Bermuda more, Chairman of Bank of But-terfie ld, a Harvard Business Law [graduate], member of Alpha Phi A lpha fraternity, Mr. Speaker .
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellHe was at Harvard Bus iness School, yes, which is crè me de la cr ème, Mr. Speaker . Crème de la cr ème. That is Obama- type of stuff, right? We need to celebrate our own like that a bit more. And I have a great deal of respect …
He was at Harvard Bus iness School, yes, which is crè me de la cr ème, Mr. Speaker . Crème de la cr ème. That is Obama- type of stuff, right? We need to celebrate our own like that a bit more. And I have a great deal of respect for the Barclay Simmons’s of Bermuda who have achieved those things. And this whole panel came together . . . I do not know who can associate individual members with any political position, but I see this as an independent panel. And, in fact, they passed what I call the ICE test —Integrity, Credibility and Expertise —Mr. Speaker . They had them all.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThey passed that test. And when my honourable business partner brought me the Report as soon as he got it and said, Have a read, I stopped what I was doing and I read it, Mr. Speaker . I read it. And as far as I am concerned, whatever reservations …
They passed that test. And when my honourable business partner brought me the Report as soon as he got it and said, Have a read, I stopped what I was doing and I read it, Mr. Speaker . I read it. And as far as I am concerned, whatever reservations I may have had, this Report put it to rest. It put it to rest because we can debate this, we can talk about the length of years, we can talk about the diversion of revenues, there are so many components to this deal that we can isolate and debate, but at the end of the day, as far as I am concerned, it is a com-plicated deal, it is a complex deal, and it requires the views of experts. You hand it over to experts and say, Have a look and give us your opinion. And that is what was done. And their opinion came back that this was a good deal —commercially sound and a good deal and the best option for Bermuda going forward. And so, for me, Mr. Speaker , if people want to address the Report, that is on them. For me, that was good enough because the individuals were individuals who have the integrity, the credibility, and the expertise. Mr. Speaker, as I said, I said publicly today that I was going to support this. I have certainly met with all of the individuals —not all of them —but I have met with individuals representing both sides of this debate. We have heard from experts in the industry. I am glad that the Minister decided to [select] the Blue Ribbon Panel. I wish he had done it, maybe, a little earlier. But I want to end on this, Mr. Speaker, and I think that we need a bit more of this in this House. I have had political differences with the Government recently, and I am sure I will have more, so this is not about partisanship or anything of that nature. I am speaking about what I know in terms of my relatio nship and I know that the Minister of Finance is committed to doing what is right for this country. I knew that when he was in the Oppositio n, and I know that since he has been the Minister of F inance, that he has been dedicated to doing what is right for this country, and he has the most difficult portfolio of anyone in Government —the most difficult. I also believe the Opposition [Leader] is committed to doing what is right for the country and he may dis agree with the Minister of Finance. But at the end of the day, I do not believe that the Minister of Finance would get this country involved in and get this country committed to a bad deal. I do not believe he will do that. So there is a lot that is on the line. There are a lot of assumptions and speculation that needs to oc-cur. We need to ensure that we continue to grow our tourism. We need to ensure that our business sector remains robust and healthy. We need to ensure that this country continues on the right path in order for this project to be successful. And if the project is suc-cessful, if all of those things happen, then Bermuda is successful. So, yes, there are risks involved. There is risk involved in everything that we do and particularly 534 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly at this level. But I would like say it has been a long journey. The Minister of Finance has stuck to the wicket against significant opposition. I congratulate the Opposition Leader for his tenacity and his belief in this as well, and he stuck to his position as well. But Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day, it is the independent view that has persuaded me that the right thing to do is to take their advice. And if they say that this is good, if they say that this is going to benefit Bermuda, then I accept that. And on those premises, Mr. Speaker, I will be supporting this project. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will recognise the Deputy Speaker.
Mrs. Suzann Rob erts-HolshouserThank you . Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker . If I could say “ditto” to the Member who just took his seat, I would, but I would not be doing justice to the members that I represent in my constituency , but ditto. Well presented, well said, and it …
Thank you . Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker . If I could say “ditto” to the Member who just took his seat, I would, but I would not be doing justice to the members that I represent in my constituency , but ditto. Well presented, well said, and it is very diff icult to follow behind, but I am going to do the best I can. I am pleased to actually have this opportunity to be standing here to speak on behalf of the people, not only in my constituency , but I think specifically t onight for those individuals that I have spoken to, met with, who actually live in my constituency . But I would like to lead off, Mr. Speaker , with my confusion, I think, I would begin. First of all with the Member that spoke before the last Member who took his seat. I remember when he spoke so passio nately and I looked wide- eyed at him, but I then r emembered that he was Leader of the United Bermuda Party, and for me all he has done is changed his tie. Progressive Labour Party —“progressive” to me, Mr. Speaker , [represents] for me new liberal ideas, new ideas, things that are different, things that move for-ward, not necessarily standing still. “Labour”, it has disturbed me greatly for someone not to be seen or speak to or encourage the airport development, which means labour, jobs, which [are needed] so badly, and often we hear in this House how the One Bermuda Alliance had suggested and did, indeed, say that we would have developed jobs. And, Mr. Speaker , that is, indeed, exactly what this project is about to do. We also heard earlier this afternoon about the concept of good governance and transparency. My, my, my, in darkness how we do slip. I do remember words, I’m sorry we had to deceive you. I also r emember an airplane flight that had to bring individuals without Bermuda k nowing. I am not saying this, Mr. Speaker , just to speak, what I am saying is those people who live in glass houses cannot throw stones. So let us get on with the Bill that we have before us. Mr. Speaker, I stand to the floor today to speak on behalf of t hose individuals who work at the airport. I feel that one of the things that we have i gnored is the necessity to be a responsible Gover nment, not only to think outside the box, to look at other ways of not increasing the debt, we cannot afford $185 million to patch, Mr. Speaker . But we do have a responsibility, Mr. Speaker, to ensure that the env ironment in which our neighbours, our constituents, our friends and our relatives, work [is safe]. Mr. Speaker, I did an opinion piece a couple of weeks , and it came from the bottom of my heart because as the daughter of an individual who spent his life at the airport, I understand that these individ uals go early in the day, work late at night, and why should they not deserve, Mr. Speaker, a healthy env ironment? Wh y is it that we think that it is acceptable that some individuals should go to work in mouldridden environments where the roof is pouring through, but it is not good enough for other individuals to be in an environment where there is mould? Double standard, Mr. Speaker, if nothing else it is a double standard. We have a responsibility and an account ability to everyone in Bermuda, and one of the responsibilities is the work environment. Individuals who work at the airport have a right to be working in an emotionally satisfying environment as well, Mr. Speaker . One of the questions that I asked some of the individuals that I spoke to was, How does it affect your everyday work? How does it affect your job? Well, the comments were, For some of us it means double work because rather than just going to do the work we are supposed to do we find ourselves cleaning up; it’s not a healthy environment so you don’t really want to come to work. But when you get there, Mr. Speaker , I am sure that you would recognise ind ividuals showing up for work with smiles on their faces. Very seldom do you see them or hear them complaining when you are actually at the airport. For me it is a facade. The airport building is a facade. It is the face of a building that looks pretty good, pretty healthy, pretty substantial, but it is the integrity, it is the infrastructure that we need to be concerned about. So it is the credibility of the infr astructure—is it suitable? Is this something that we need to do? And we heard the Member who just took his seat. He asked himself the same question, Is this something we need to do? Is it something that we can spend $185 million on the patchwork? And if I can remember what Mr. Adderley said (and I am par aphrasing, Mr. Speaker ), it was, And that doesn’t i nclude how we keep the airport running at the same time as fixing the roofs? And the smell of the sewage? Mr. Speaker, no one should have to work in an environment that, when the tides come up, and you cannot flush the toilet and you have to smell sewage . . . I mean, it is not just the staff who work there; it also affects our tourists. No one should have to be part of that work environment.
Bermuda House of Assembly Some of the words that were used to describe the airport, Mr. Speaker, by Members . . . and I will point this out. Someone had mentioned earlier in the debate that the Member from constituency 4 needs to speak on behalf of the constituents. Well, indeed, exactly. I am, Mr. Speaker. And I would also tell the Member from constituency 3 that I had an individual find me out in St. George’s just last week so he could show me pictures of the rain pour-ing in that he had worked in at the airport that mor ning. So even the Member from constituency 3 needs to take and heed the same advice that I was given. You need to sp eak to the members in your constituency as well. Because you do not just support a certain segment of people. But some of the words (Mr. Speaker, if you do not mind if I just look down at my notes because I want to quote them properly) were: deplorable; t he bag room is cold in the winter and the hottest in the summer ; wind goes right through you; rain comes right into the building, while the staff are used to wor king in the rain; I feel sorry for the passengers who walk in the puddles . . . old as the hill s. These are not suitable conditions, Mr. Speaker , for anybody. And it reminds me of the old adage or the old story of . . . I have my favourite pair of jeans and because they are my favourite pair of jeans and the knees have worn out, I am going to patch my favourite pair of jeans so I can get them lasting a little longer. In this particular case, let us say the patch costs $185 million. So I am going to patch my jeans so I can wear them a little longer. I bend over, Mr. Speaker , to tie my laces, and guess what? The bottom splits. So, Mr. Speaker , rather than fixing my jeans . . . the solution is not temporary. It is a long- term solution, because those individuals who actually work at the airport deserve to work in a better environment. I am not going to speak very long, Mr. Speaker, but one of the things I also wanted to point out was that there has been a lot of information. Yes, perhaps slower. It could have been a little faster. But there has been a lot of information out there. And also, in my mind, if you are like me, I depended on individuals to come help and guide me into what this means. So when, Mr. Speaker , the Blue Ribbon Panel said (if I can quote from a statement that they made that the national debt is at a level to where taking full ownership of a project of this nature is not feasible), “The Panel has concluded the Government is correct to mitigate this risk” (of a downgrade from more debt) “as far as possible, and the best way in this context is to ensure the financing for this project is taken on by third parties.” Mr. Speaker, no Government wants to ignore the people in need. And while it has been thrown out there that money could be spent here, there . . . money should also be spent on something that is the thor-oughfare for individuals coming to visit Bermuda. But more importantly for me, Mr. Speaker, that airport needs to be upgraded to a standard that we Bermudians take pride in. Mr. Speaker, we deserve it. But most i mportantly, I need to know that my constituents . . . I need to know that when they go to work they are working in a healthy environment, they are working in a safe environment. Because, Mr. Speaker , they d eserve it, just like we deserve to come in this room when the mould has been cleaned. We were delayed coming into this H ouse, Mr. Speaker , because of the mould. And so, therefore, if cleaning this House was a priority for us to get our work done, then I believe replacing the airport to bring a standard that is workable for those individuals in my constituency and in your constituency and in ever yone’s different constituenc ies should be done in order for them to work in a healthy, conducive environment that is productive. And I believe it is our responsibility. It is our responsibility as a Government. And the One Bermuda Alliance (under the auspices of the Finance Minister and his team) has found a way, has been creative. In fact, Mr. Speaker, we have been progressive in finding a way that individuals can go to work and be proud of where they work and also be healthy becaus e of the environment they are working in. R ather than patching it, which was one of the things I needed to look at as an individual . . . I wanted to find out, Well is this something that we could patch? Is it something that we could make workable? But Mr. Speaker , while we are patching up one area we do not know what the infrastructure is like. So we put on a roof, Mr. Speaker, and then the walls crumble. We fix, perhaps . . . Well, we cannot fix the sewage now can we? The smell. Because that is tidal, which is one of the reasons why we need to . . . and the individual who is interrupting me, Mr. Speaker . . . I know he has already spoken, and I will try my best to ignore him, Mr. Speaker, as I know that is what you would guide me to do. Mr. Speaker, so generally, of course, I do believe in transparency. I have always believed in integ-rity. And I believe that is exactly what we are bringing here. And I appreciate the fact that there are different opinions, and I agree with the fact that that is what we are supposed to do. We are supposed to look at it all. We have to recognise that it might not fit every sc enario, but we have to do something. And this som ething for me, Mr. Speaker, is looking at those individ uals who have more knowledge about what it costs for construction, who have more knowledge about what it will take for us to bring our standards up than I do. So I did wait and I did take a good look at information that has been put forward to us. Mr. Speaker, I am comfortable, personally, in supporting wh at we will debate and continue to debate as part of the Airport Development because I believe it is the way forward. And I am very proud to be part of 536 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly the One Bermuda Alliance, who have been progressive with their ideas. Mr. Speaker, in closing, “It is no use saying, ‘We are doing our best .’ You have got to succeed in doing what is necessary” —in the words of [Sir] Wi nston Churchill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member . The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 17, MP Walton Brown. And Honourable Deputy Speaker, can you come so I can get some dinner? Not because of you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou will not take an offence.
Mr. Walton BrownI am sure you will be listening in your Chambers. Mr. Speaker —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHold on one second, so you will not lose any time.
Mr. Walton BrownI think I probably need to have an extra five minutes, Mr. Speaker , for leaving as I take to the microphone. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Walton BrownI want five extra minutes. [Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMember, you have lost no time. I will hit the start button right now. You have the floor.
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker . Madam Deputy Speaker, this debate and the opposition that has evolved around this airport deal has less to do with whether or not we need a new ai rport, and more to do with the terms and conditions that the airport will be built …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker . Madam Deputy Speaker, this debate and the opposition that has evolved around this airport deal has less to do with whether or not we need a new ai rport, and more to do with the terms and conditions that the airport will be built under. So I think we need to dispense with the notion that those who have is-sues with this proposed Bill have issues with whether or not we need a new airport. We can have a debate about that; but that is not the essence of the challenge. I would like to start my remarks, Madam Deputy Speaker, by evoking the language used by the Honourable Finance Minister when he got to his feet to open the debate . . . sorry, when he was closing his debate. He said that we are welcome to have our own opinions, but we are not entitled to have our own facts. I am going to get to that. I want to juxtapose the Honourable Finance Minister’s comments with the comments made by the Honourable Opposition Lead-er, who stated . . . well, first of all he evoked the Ame rican legal notion of fruit from the poisonous tree and then he said when you start out bad, it can never be made better . . . words to that effect. Madam Deputy Speaker, my challenge with this Bill and this contract revolves around the very manner in which this project was initiated. When the Minister of Finance came to this House and presented a Ministerial Statement on the fundamental thrust of this project he stated, in no uncertain terms, that the Canadian Commercial Corporation would identify the best Canadian company to undertake this project. That statement, Madam Deputy Speaker, was a wilful misleading of this Parliament. When the Minister gets to respond to everyone I am hoping, I am expecting, I am encouraging the Minister to make a full and u nqualified apology to this House for misleading this House on the matter of the role of CCC and Aecon. For the sake of absolute clarity, Madam Deputy Speaker, if you will permit me, I will read two stat ements from —
Mr. Walton BrownIn one part of the Statement the Member says: “There will be a Canadian infrastructure developer. CCC will conduct its own due diligence to be satisfied that the Canadian developer has the technical, financial, managerial capability to deliver on the contract.” That is the first part. The second relevant part …
In one part of the Statement the Member says: “There will be a Canadian infrastructure developer. CCC will conduct its own due diligence to be satisfied that the Canadian developer has the technical, financial, managerial capability to deliver on the contract.” That is the first part. The second relevant part of his Statement, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I quote: “CCC will select a Canadian Developer from its already preselected stable of Canadian firms.” We now know as a matter of fact, not opinion, that Aecon preselected itself. We know as a matter of fact, not opinion, that Aecon approached the C anad ian Commercial Corporation with a view toward getting the deal in Bermuda. I am following the Minister’s di-rective. These are not my facts, these are the facts and there is no alternative, Madam Deputy Speaker . These are the facts. The Minister, by his own admission today, met with Aecon, the Canadian Imperial Bank of Co mmerce, minimally . . . and perhaps also the Canadian Commercial Corporation in May of 2014. When he presented his Ministerial Statement in November of 2014, Madam Deputy Speaker, there was no mention of Aecon. The impression that was given to the Ber-mudian public, to this Parliament, was that CCC would
Bermuda House of Assembly conduct an objective assessment among its repertoire of Canadian companies and identify the best company to do this project. Clear misleading of this House. And I am demanding an apology from the Honourable Mi nister for having done so. We know further, Madam Deputy Speaker , through the Public Access to Information out of the Canadian Government that Aecon actually conspired with CCC to mi srepresent what CCC was doing in Bermuda. It is not opinion; that is fact. It was in the disclosed e- mails. It is now part of the public domain of records. So I view the start of this Bill, Madam Deputy Speaker , as a corrupted enterprise, because CCC had no intention of selecting among a repertoire of companies. It was preselected by Aecon. So the very essence of the work that was meant to be undertaken by the supposedly neutral Canadian Government ent ity was corrupted from the very beginning. They were not looking for anybody. Aecon found them. I remember, I guess it was last year at one of the meetings held by Aecon to talk about the project, I do not remember the person’s name, but I remember asking him a question at the public meeting. Can you tell this audience if you approached CCC about this project or whether CCC approached you? His r esponse was not to answer the question. His response was to talk about his many years of experience in de-veloping airports —misdirection. So we have a problem at that level. And because CCC did not properly assess which Canadian company could best do it, we cannot possibly know what the best deal is. I was prepared to accept, in the absence of a full RFP process that if a neutral Canadian Government entity where its raison d’être is to identify opportunities for Canadian companies, if a neutral Canadian Government entity was going to do the effective vetting process that an RFP would pr ovide for, I was prepared to accept CCC as a legitimate entity to make that undertaking . . . an honest broker. We now know as a matter of fact that CCC was not an honest broker and it is not an honest br oker. And in my view the Canadian Government has compromised its ability to properly and objectively de-liver on what it is mandated to do in terms of international development and cooperation. It is virtually akin to how USAID works. Just very briefly, United States Aid around the world is established to benefit a lot of countries. But really it helps to promote US interests worldwide by giving business to American companies. We have heard a lot about expertise, Madam Deputy Speaker . If you follow the directive of my good friend the honourable Shawn Crockwell, we have no business even debating it because, as he said, a whole panel of experts have looked at it and we should just accept what conclusion they have arrived at. Any panel that has looked at this has looked purely and simply at the financial model and whether it makes sense. That is not the issue here. The issue is how did we get here? Our will as Members of the Legislature is to properly assess everything that comes before us. We are not here to rubber stamp. We are not here to rubber stamp. So, yes, that panel looked at it. Many panels have looked at it. Even the UK Government has opined apparently to say they are happy with the deal. And let me remind this Honourable Chamber, Madam Deputy Speaker , that the UK Government has no credibility when it comes to opining on the most appropriate airport deals and structures. For those of you who do not know, the UK Government spent £285 million to build an airport in a fellow British Colony.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Walton BrownNo, no, not Pitcairn. A fellow . . . I should say Overseas Territory (if you speak modern day nomenclature). I just like “Colony,” because that is what it is. They spent £285 million to put an airport in St. Helena. St. Helena is one of the most isolated Over-seas …
No, no, not Pitcairn. A fellow . . . I should say Overseas Territory (if you speak modern day nomenclature). I just like “Colony,” because that is what it is. They spent £285 million to put an airport in St. Helena. St. Helena is one of the most isolated Over-seas Territories. One of the most isolated places in the world. They have had no airport up until now. And I have been to many conferences with people from St. Helena. It takes them two weeks sometimes to get to a place because the boat only comes once a m onth. And if you miss that boat, you are stuck for the next boat to come. So they built this airport, Madam Deputy Speaker , I guess they cannot use it because no one factored into the equation the wind. The way it is built they cannot land the planes —£285 million and the planes cannot land— two years ago. So Government, be careful when you get the UK’s blessing on a pr oject. Let me just say that that is a matter of fact, that is not opinion. So I am just fundamentally perturbed that we can go with a corrupted enterprise and carry out this deal. Because you started badly, you started in a cor-rupt manner. So I thought I would do a little bit of surveying of the key facts. I went and talked to a contractor who is an OBA supported. I said to him, Are you okay w ith the Canadian Commercial Corporation looking for the most appropriate Canadian company to build this ai rport? He said, Oh, yes, absolutely. I said, Good. What if I told you that CCC did not select anybody, but that the company that has the contract selected the contract for themselves? [He said] Oh, that’s not right. Is it true? I said, Yes. And after he found out that that was true , he said, Well, we need a new airport anyway. So, that was just his political position. But from a contractor’s standpoint he realised that som ething was fundamentally wrong. 538 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly I went to another person who I respect a great deal, an international business executive who has not to my knowledge . . . to my knowledge no known political affiliation. And he, too, was gravely concer ned when he found out that there was no proper vetting of po-tential contractors to do this deal. And then just last weekend I spoke to a me mber of this eminent highly regarded Blue Ribbon Panel. And he said to me, Why didn’t you come to the hearings and raise your concerns? I said, Because your mandate is very focused and limited. Your mandate was just to consider how good a deal it is in terms of the financial model, whether the Government or the private company can make a good return on investment. You didn’t focus on the start of it. And so I explained to him my concern about how it all began. His response was (I am not going to name him), Well, that’s the way business is done. That was his response. That is the way bus iness is done— to deceive, to misrepresent, to get work. Maybe that is the way business is done. Our responsibility is to challenge, to critique, to assess, and to urge Government to do better. We have had so much talk about transpare ncy, about openness. Even the Honourable Deputy Speaker said, What about when the PLP was in power? That is not an answer, with respect, Madam Deputy Speaker , because if anyone is saying that what was done under the PLP was wrong, there is no merit whatsoever in drawing a comparison to what was done under the PLP as if to say if it was done then, it is done now. Whatever is wrong is wrong. No matter what side of the fence you are on, no matter time of year it is, what is wrong is wrong. So transparency is important. Openness is important. Madam Deputy Speaker, having to talk about this issue reminds me of a movie I saw many years ago. It is called 1900, it is a brilliant movie. I do not know if anyone knows it, produced by the great Italian director Bernardo Bertolucci. It charts the rise and fall of Fascism in Italy from the standpoint of a Fascist and a Communist, and they were friends growing up. But there is a very, very poignant scene in this movie where one of the actors, part of the wealthy elite, saw the damages that were being done by the rising Fas-cism under Mussolini. And rather than deal with the Fascism, she acted like she was blind. She walked around for the rest of the movie, I can’t see, I can’t see, because she did not want to deal with what was in front of her. But we have to deal with what is in front of us, Madam Deputy Speaker. The deal started out wrong. We cannot possibly know what the best option is. And do not be confused. Do not be confused by the Go vernment saying that they considered all their options. They told us that CCC was going to do the vetting. We have seen no name of any other company that was vetted because there was no other company. And on that basis alone, Madam Deputy Speaker, the project is flawed at the very beginning. I would like to put Aecon on notice that we on this side of the House view with great gravity the manner in which this deal has come about. It will be passed tonight; we have no doubt. We view with great gravity how this deal has come about. We have grave concerns about a multitude of issues relating to the project and whenever the opportunity arises the Members on this side of the House, who currently sit on this side of the House, will work as much as we can to ameliorate both the damage that has been done to Bermuda’s long- term future as well as ensuring that principles of good governance have a far greater degree of presence in shaping how this co ntract evolves over time. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker .
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill? Thank you . The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. You have the floor. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker . Madam Deputy Speaker, first before I st art, …
Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill? Thank you . The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. You have the floor. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker . Madam Deputy Speaker, first before I st art, I would like to thank those peaceful protestors, the People’s Campaign, in the names of Reverend Tweed, Chris Furbert, Jason Hayward. And I would also like to thank Larry Burchall and Mr. Mayor for their contribution in bringing information to the general public. And Madam Deputy Speaker, even all those in this Parliament, I would like to thank them also. But Madam Deputy Speaker , I start off with a question. Initially, did the Minister have permission for a waiver? The answer is no. And that informat ion comes from the Accountant General, Madam Deputy Speaker . Madam Deputy Speaker, under rules and regulations when you want to do a waiver, it has to be in writing. In fact, it was the Accountant General who told the Public Accounts Committee that that r equest came . . . it was a verbal request. So that is not right, it is contrary to the rules. Madam Deputy Speaker, just imagine som ething as large as this and you are going to have a ver-bal conversation on the phone asking for a waiver, not even giving the Accountant General information for him to make a decision on this basis. In fact the Accountant General said, That was not the intent, to give a waiver to construction stages. I didn’t give a waiver to construction stage, just initial . . . you know, he never thought it was this big. Never provided with the information. If that had gone the proper way, the letters and everything that was nec-essary would have been put on that document to the Attorney General. And I am sure that the Attorney
Bermuda House of Assembly General would have gone through all the protocols to make sure that he had given this permission. One of the requirements, criteria that the A ccountant General looks for, is comparisons. He did not have that. And one should not even make a decision like that not having the expertise around them. You are asking an accountant to make a decision on . . . having no comparison to compare the figures, having no engineers to consider the whole project. And th e other thing . . . the request coming verbally. So there was no waiver given at the initial start of this. They got it later. They definitely got it lat-er. And they did not have the Entrustment Letter. Well, that is not a criticism. The Entrustment Letter . . . b ecause I do not think they thought they needed one. But Madam Deputy Speaker, just to continue where the last speaker that sat down left off about getting an approval from the UK Government. I do not consider that in any sense of this a good thing. B ecause it was the same UK Government . . . and I am not talking about what party. But the Government of the UK permitted segregation to continue in Bermuda when it was outlawed in the UK. So how can I feel good about the UK that allowed the Government of the day to continue with segregation laws they had in this country many, many years after they were abo lished in the UK? So you see the problems I would have with taking that from the UK. Not only that, Madam Deputy Speaker, the UK stopped this in other parts of the world. They stopped the airport project in Cayman. But I did not see the reasons inside here. I can go into why I think they stopped it, but I am not going to do that. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bermuda Government signed a Charter, probably in 2002, som ewhere down there, where the UK, just like they helped St. Helena’s island to build that airport, that we could have gone to. Not to say that the UK Government would have financed the building of an airport in Ber-muda, but certainly we could have gotten the technical knowledge and information from them . . . help from them. This is one of the Colonies and we come under their Charter. But the Government did not even do that. Because if you are looking for the best deal for this country, then you would go . . . my first approach would be to go to the UK Government, not the Cana-dian Government or anywhere else, because of their Charter. And to say that the UK Government would not have helped us, well, we do not know. We never made that approach. Madam Deputy Speaker, why did this not go out to tender so that you and I and all of us would have known that we had some comparison? And out of the five (or how many) bids that would have come in the Government would have been able to choose which one was best for Bermuda. We did not have that. On something as big as this, that is not som ething that we need overnight . . . everybody agrees that we should have something, some improvements down there. But I am not going to be caught out by water coming through the ceilings or mould or sewage. We have got to fix those things. All of them are fixable. And if we allow . . . any Government that a llows that airport to have that type of water coming in, mould infested buildings, sewage that you smell . . . somebody is irresponsible. I am sure they have a maintenance team down there. In fact, I think in the last budget the Gover nment cut substantially the maintenance grant for the airport. Why? Even if everybody agreed for a new air-port, we have still got to maintain that for the 40 months that it takes to build one, and we have got to keep it in tip- top shape. And then water was coming in like that. It looked somebody deliberately left it like that so we can show the world we have got water coming in through our lights. You know what danger . . . and you spoke about it. You are right. Do you know what danger that put the staff in? Water and electricity mixed together? This Government was prepared . . . they have done it . . . not prepared, they have done it in order t o try to make a case for what they are trying to do at the airport. Madam Deputy Speaker, let me say it has been stated by the Government that the first impres-sion people get of Bermuda is the airport. Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, I do not know about other people, but when I travel and return my objective is to get in and out as quick as I can. No hotel room rates are determined by the condition or the size of your airport. None whatsoever. So that does not bother me. And yes, I am concerned about the airport and the mould in this House. But we have got some schools with some children in them that have got mould and what have you. In fact, it was in September Premier Dunkley and the Minister for Education were on TV just heralding that . . . how the schools are rated. They’re in tip- top shape. We’ve got them all ready. Three weeks later Warwick Secondary School was out because of health and safety issues. Warwick Sec is out now with health and safety issues. So that was just a photo- op. They did not know the condition of those schools, but they were prepared to do a photo-op for election. And just three weeks later you have the mould. And then for the Minister to say, Well, we wanted to bypass all these RFPs because we have not had a good record with this proc ess . . . foolis hness. Foolishness. And then he went on to put in his statement about the Dame Lois Browne- Evans Buil ding, his figures. He said $60 million and we had to spend another $30 million to complete. Not another $70 million to complete —that is not true. The contract was for $68.7 million and 83 per cent of the school was completed for $51 million. But when the contractor was dismissed, they hired Somers Construction—one of the big shots in Aecon. And it took them $70 million to complete 17 per cent of the school. But the 540 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Auditor did not . . . we did not hear from him or an ybody else. Prior to that, just about every day [there] was a negative report in the newspaper complaining about the construction up there. Do you know why, Madam Deputy Speaker ? Because the owners, the contractors, look a little darker than me. That is the only re ason, because when Somers went up there was not one word, nothing in any . . . no special audits, not hing in the newspaper. That is the two worlds we live in. And you know we . . . and let me say about the Dame Lois Browne- Evans Building, let me repeat this, I said it last week. They talk about overruns for the Dame Lois Browne- Evans Building. If you look in your Budget Book (maybe the last one or the one be-fore that) you will see Dame Lois Browne- Evans Building had a total approved funding of $101 million. It was completed for $98.5 million. Madam Deputy Speaker, they also are talking about the Heritage Wharf, that [there were] all these overruns. And I said this last week but it is worth r epeating: Heritage Wharf was nine years getting star ted—plans changed, chopped and changed . . . not Heritage Wharf, I am sorry, TCD [Transport Control Department] .
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerYes, you had the wrong direction, yes. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: TCD. And it was nine years getting started and ev ery time a change was made it was brought to this House to approve the funding, before any money was spent. Not a dime was spent unless it …
Yes, you had the wrong direction, yes.
Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: TCD. And it was nine years getting started and ev ery time a change was made it was brought to this House to approve the funding, before any money was spent. Not a dime was spent unless it was approved by this House. It was not the same plan. There were changes in the plans. And the Government under-stands this, you know. They are not that . . . well, you know, they are not astute in construction (it is quite obvious by this rhetoric they run out). But that TCD building was only $978 . . . $978,000 over, that is all. Not millions and millions like they describe it to be. And again, the Government continues to mislead this country. Now Madam Deputy Speaker , you know, the Government has got a lot of money to give away to this company, and I will go into that later on with some figures. But you know we had a serious fire in Berm uda, I think it was last year. And the fire truck’s stepladder was not working. They did not have any money for it. They did not fix it. They did not fix it. Then we have the cost to build this. Since this has been discussed (what?) 27 months ago, we had about four different prices. I think it started at $200 million. The last I heard it was $267 million. And I think probably before we finish tonight it will be probably about $280 [million]. You know, I am just speculating because of the way it has been going up here. That is a lot of money. You know, the Minister said this morning in his opening statement (or earlier this afternoon) we borrowed $665 million and the Opposition did not say anything. That was fine. Then we borrowed another $500 million. But what he failed to tell us is: What is the total payback? And I think that was for a ten- year period. What are we going to pay back in addition to the $665 million? I bet you it is no comparison to the deal they gave to Aecon. And let me restate this because people need to hear it again. Aecon brought CCC to the table, not the other way around. And as the Honourable Mem-ber from whatever (Walton Brown) said, this thing was flawed from the start because CCC cannot be a credi-ble organisation. Do you know why, Madam Deputy Speaker ? Aecon was coming to Bermuda for a meeting and they went to CCC and said, Look, let me use some of your letterhead for a letter. Why would they do that? Aecon . . . I think it is “a” “con,” but whatever. But this is what they did. Why would you do that if you are a reputable company? It does not seem right to me. Now before I get into the other thing, they say, We are going to build this on time and on budget. Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, it is easy to say that. And you can say that if there is enough money in the contract. Most contracts have a contingency fee in them. And I can assure you, even with the hospital project, just like this one, the contingency fee has been inflated probably three or four times more than the normal. That is why you can say that because in Bermuda you do not know what you are going to find when you are building so you must . . . and these are foreigners coming from Canada to Bermuda to build—so they do not know what they are going to find until they get down here. I know they do not know this land like we do, like the [contractors] and engineers here. They had to do a lot of geotechnical work. And even sometimes when yo u do that what you see in this spot is different over at this spot. That is what happens. If you have got enough money in that contract what you can do . . . if it slows up you have got money to hire more peo-ple. You make mistakes; you have got more money to buy more materials. Those things happened down at the hospital, too, you know. We did not hear about it; but I can guarantee you if it was one of us as the contractor you would have heard about it. It would have been in the newspaper. Because they had a whole container load of wiring that they took out from the hospital that was incorrect wire, the gauge of it and stuff like that. But you will not hear about it. You will never hear about it. So when you are talking about on time and on budget . . . I thi nk it is important that I repeat this. Yes, they say that, because they inflate the contingency fee about four times. If a contingency fee was, let us say $15 million, they would put $60 million there. And the Government comes here, sticks their chest out saying
Bermuda House of Assembly it is going to be on budget, on time. Well, good! For that type of money, it should be on budget, on time.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Twelve minutes, jeez. All right. Okay, we will try to get through. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker , one complaint down at the airport is talking about when we have hurricanes and stuff like that and we get water. That hap-pened once or maybe . . . because I am not that old. But I know it happened once and we put a berm in. That berm right around the airport stopped the water from coming over. And if it got higher then you just increased the berm. But I talked to one reputable engineer some years ago when I was the Minister of Works and E ngineering, a white guy (a little lighter than me), and he said the problem with the water in that Castle Harbour is not . . . it cannot get out quick enough. You have only got a little space to get under the bridge. He said, You’ve got to open that up. And once you open that up, the water can get through. It is a lmost like there is two feet now, if you open it up to 30 feet the water would go through. And that is how you get that build up. And the other thing is, I am not so sure we need a bridge like it has been suggested by even us and the present Government. I think we need to open the bridge up probably about 100 yards and then r eclaim land on the rest of it. You know we reclaimed nine acres of land in Dockyard for $39 million. We need to reclaim some land down there because I can tell you, a country this size should reclaim as much land as we can. And there is one side that makes it easier to reclaim than the other side, and that hurr icane or whatever will not move that. And it would not be much pressure because you can move the . . . you know, if you open it up, the water would go through. But Madam Deputy Speaker, let us look at the payback on this project. Let us say it cost $267 million (with the last price we got). If you look at the 2016/17 Budget Book, you will see that the expenses for Head 31 (that is the Airport) were just about $20 million, just under $20 [million]. And the revenue was about $18 million. So you almost lost $2 million down there. And I think the Minister, when he was asked the question not so long ago, said we were about even. Okay. Yes. But what they are going to do . . . now I am taking Aviation out of there because you are removing that, and I think it is the right thing to do. But I am going to base everything on today’s figures. The head tax in the Budget Book for this year is $18,945,000. That would give you a difference, a profit with that, of $17 million. If you multiply that by 30 years that is $510 million. That is what we are giving to Aecon. Now, we are going to take back some ex-penses, we are going to pay for the lights. It is expe nsive so we have got to pay for our lights and the air controllers and that stuff to a tune of $14.9 million a year which the taxpayer will have to pay. And Madam Deputy Speaker , if you multiply that by 30, it is $447 million. If you total those two, it comes to $957 million, just under a billion dollars. And I have not taken into consideration the $20- something increase that we are going to get shortly, the mandatory —because in the Agreement it has a mandatory —inflation increase every year based on the Bermuda and US inflation rate. They get that every year. And fees are going up each year. So if you add all that on to it with the $20-plus on the head tax, it is going to add up to at least $1.4 billion. This is the money that they are going to get. Each year now we are paying $20 million for expenses. So do not tell me . . . this is not all revenue. I am talking about revenue and expenses. It is a little different from what the others have been saying, right? I am trying to bring this home. So you see, Madam Deputy Speaker, I am estimating. And I should say I am “guesstimating,” because this is a minimum. I am doing very conservative figures at $957 million. But I reckon it will be more like $1.4 bi llion. Madam Deputy Speaker, if you amortise that over 30 years at 6 per cent, you really will probably be paying just over $500 million total. That is your $267 . . . it almost doubles at 6 per cent over 30 years. But when you take this figure it is going to be more like 16 per cent. Who gets 16 per cent on their inves tment? And this would be US dollars, Madam Deputy Speaker . Remember they are going to bring all those workers down here. And let me say this here first. The Government workers have not had an increase in wage in six years, no guarantees, but have had an increase in health insurance of at least 40 per cent, payroll taxes gone up . . . all these things have gone up for them. Food, lights, everything else. And we are going to guarantee a billionaire company, a billion do llar company . . . they a re not going to pay any payroll tax to this country, no work permit fees, no land tax, no electricity —
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThat is another Bill. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, okay. but . . . and we are going to paying all of this to them —to a billio n dollar company. Mrs. Smith has still got to pay for her light bill. Sometimes her lights are turned off. And …
That is another Bill.
Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, okay. but . . . and we are going to paying all of this to them —to a billio n dollar company. Mrs. Smith has still got to pay for her light bill. Sometimes her lights are turned off. And we are guaranteeing this? And you say this will not appear on the books? Well, these have to appear on the books somewhere because if they do not reach their mini-mum revenue we are guaranteeing them that. So you have got to take the money out of the Consolidated Fund so it has got to be an entry into the books. 542 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly You and I are paying for that. And we are pa ying the $14.9 million as it stands now for these other services. I would like to have a deal like that. I wish I could buy Dunkley’s Dairy like that and Michael would pay my electricity and everything else.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerHonourable Member . Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: I said Michael.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerCorrect. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Right.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAnd that is not correct in the House. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: No, no, you do not know who I am referring to. [Laughter] Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Anyhow, Madam . . . if . . . because I would say the Honourable Premier (because I am not …
And that is not correct in the House. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: No, no, you do not know who I am referring to. [Laughter] Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Anyhow, Madam . . . if . . . because I would say the Honourable Premier (because I am not going to come up and disrespect the Premier regardless of what party he belongs to) . . . that is the Premier and I respect that. So that is not where I am at. So, Madam Deputy Speaker , all these costs . . . and then the other question I asked . . . how much time have I got left, 10 minutes?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerFour minutes. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Okay. We have got to have a space down there for our immigration, cus-toms, cargo shed, postal. We have got to pay rent to whatever they call them . . . Aecon, whoever (I do not know who they are). But we are …
Four minutes. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Okay. We have got to have a space down there for our immigration, cus-toms, cargo shed, postal. We have got to pay rent to whatever they call them . . . Aecon, whoever (I do not know who they are). But we are going to have to pay rent to them. This is privatisation. We are giving them complete control over our airport. We have got to pay rent to operate our customs and immigration and postal work down there and cargo shed. This is not right, Madam Deputy Speaker . We can build that airport ourselves over, I would say a five- year period, and it does not have to be that big because we are not going to get back to the days of the 1970s and 1980s. We do not now have the 10,000 hotel beds we [had]. Thank God we are getting some more, but we are never going to get back to the 10,000 beds because a lot of those prop-erties have changed. There is really no property left to build that many rooms to get the 10,000 beds. So you can have less folks. But we dealt with that crowd when we had that same airport, so we do not need this big airport. We do not need . . . no mould down there if we are not a hub. Nobody . . . we go down to get out and people come to get out also. They are not around there waiting for a connecting flight. That does not happen in Bermuda. Madam Deputy Speaker , the workers now . . . the Government has said . . . when t hey first said it they said 75 per cent of the workers would be Berm udian, 25 per cent would be non- Bermudians. Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, that has changed. It has changed to 60/40 now. And do you know what the end result is? The Minister said it was supposed to be 75 per cent of us (and that was 600 jobs), and 25 per cent for guest workers. Twenty five per cent of 600 is 150, and the other 450 would have been Bermudians. Now it is down to 60/40. So now it is 400 jobs. So what would happen there is we will get 60 per cent, that is what they are saying, which will be 240 jobs, the guest workers will get 40 per cent or 160 jobs. What happens there? It means Bermudian workers lose 210 jobs from his first initial statement and guest workers gain 10 jobs. Why are we the ones that have always got to lose under this Government? It is not right, Madam Deputy Speaker . But see, they promised that to us before at the Heritage Wharf improvement. They said 60 per cent of the workers would be Bermudians and 40 per cent wo uld be non- Bermudians. And when we asked about that, they said they were not in a position to give those fig-ures yet. But when they brought figures, they would say . . . how they would calculate is, for example, they will take . . . say you need 4 workers over a 12- week period. In that 12- week period, 3 Bermudians will do that work over 12 weeks. You will get one Bermudian for two weeks, another Bermudian for five weeks, and the next Bermudian remained over. So they will say, we hired three Bermudians , but you have got one foreigner working this 12 weeks. So they say, See? We got 75 per cent Bermudians. No comparison. So when we asked them what were the hours that Bermudians did as opposed to guest workers? They would not tell us. Because that is the real telling answer when you can compare that—not how many workers, because you know they hire and fire like anything. I am really not believing when they say we are going to have 60 per cent because that has changed right now to 60/40. I am not believing that. The history of the Government has not been consistent in giving us the correct answers.
[Timer beeps] Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: That is for me?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerI am afraid so. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill? T he Chair recognises the Member from constituency 34. You have the floor. Bermuda House of Assembly Ms. Kim N. Wilson: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker . Madam Deputy Speaker, I am sure …
I am afraid so. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill? T he Chair recognises the Member from constituency 34. You have the floor.
Bermuda House of Assembly Ms. Kim N. Wilson: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker . Madam Deputy Speaker, I am sure I can be joined by at least those of us that formed the Legisl ative Class of 2012 when I say that on that occasion, having canvassed the constituency and worked hard to become a Member of this Honourable Chamber, I was actually thrilled and delighted to receive the o pportunity to be sworn in as a Member of Parliament. And as you know, Madam Deputy Speaker, there are principally two main functions of a Member of Parli ament. And this can be found actually in all the jurisdi ctions. I have looked at jurisdictions within the Commonwealth, in the West Indies, in the African Region, Southeast Asia, UK, Canada, even the Republic of Cuba. They all have very similar provisions as it r elates to the requirements of parliamentarians. And that is, first and foremost to, obviously, answer the call of their electorate, address concern s that may be asked, issues and concerns that may arise from members of their electorate, also lobby for their electorate with respect to local issues of concern. Similarly I recently spoke to the Minister (who unfort unately is not here for constituency 12), the Honourable Minister of Works, lobbying on behalf of some of the residents in Somerset with respect to the deplorable road conditions. That is an example, or an illustration, of what a Member of Parliament’s role is as it relates to working for the electorate. But we also have the role of working within the Parliament. And Madam Deputy Speaker, part of that, the primary responsibility as it relates to working within the Parliament, relates specifically to enacting and debating proposed new pieces of legislation (or Bills as they are referred to). And Madam Deputy Speaker, when we look at that particular provision and the legislative requir ements surrounding that, if I can just speak real quickly, principally for the persons who are listening, as a Member of Parliament our role is as legislators. We are here to address issues, we are here to read Bills that are tabled, debate them, scrutinise them, ask questions. And, regrettably to some, we do have this adversarial Westminster System. But that is the sy stem that has been adopted. And part of that system means debate, asking questions, digging down deep insofar as the provisions that we are asked as legisl ators to pass. Sometimes it can be contentious. Sometimes not. But the main objective that we have and the main role is for us to look at the nuances of the legislation, excuse me, of the Bills that we are being asked to debate. And when you look at a Bill, particularly the one that is front of us, all Bills contain very similar pr ovisions. They contain the Preamble. They contain R ecitals. They contain the Interpretation section. They contain the main body, which is obviously the enacting terms of the legislation. And then oftentimes they will have what is called an Explanatory Memorandum just to help us to understand in layman’s terms (so to speak) the importance of these provisions or what they relate to. When we look at the Bill in front of us, Madam Deputy Speaker , you will note that there are not one, not two (which is usually the case), there are nine R ecitals, which is very unusual. In fact, we have probably had motions on our Order Paper that have less than nine recitals. And it is very unusual to see so many recitals in a piece of legislation. But if I can quote, Madam Deputy Speaker , the “Joint Practical Guide of the European Parliament , the Council and the Commission” (2003) , which is e ffectively a drafting book for draftswomen and men, it speaks about what is the important role of a recital. And it says that the recital is “to set out the co ncise reasons for the chief provisions” of the legislation that you have before you. In other words, it puts what follows into context. So we have the recitals, and then what follows the recitals has been put into context by these important aspects of the Bill, which are the r ecitals. And, as I have said, we have got nine recitals in this particular Bill, which is very, very unusual. In fact, I do not believe I have seen more than one or two, but in any event that is where we are. So it is really, really, critical, Madam Deputy Speaker , for us to look at the recitals and understand how that plays into this whole exercise of debating and scrutinising pieces of legislation that come before us. When you look at the recitals in this particular Bill, and I will just quote quickly three of the recitals, they specifically speak to the Project Agreement: “AND WHEREAS the Government of Berm uda and the Canadian Commercial Corporation intend to enter into the Project Agreement;” “AND WHEREAS the Authority and the D eveloper intend to enter into an amended and restated Project Agreement to redevelop the Airport; “AND WHEREAS the Developer shall” (this is obligatory) “redevelop, operate and maintain the Air-port subject to” (and I will come to that in a moment) “the provisions of the Agreement;” So we have nine recitals all referring to this particular Agreement. And I will speak about the absence of certain documents concerning that Agre ement in a moment, but what is of particular interest to me is the fifth recital that speaks to, “Developer shall redevelop, operate and maintain the Airport subject to the provisions of the Agreement.” So that means that whatever is in the Agreement, the Developer cannot effectively act ultra vires , they cannot go outside of the Project Agreement because the recital, which is, again, part of the Bill, does not permit that. So the challenge that I have here is that we have got these recitals that speak to the Project Agreement, but they are void, they are absent certain 544 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly important, critical information that is normally co ntained in the Project Agreement, such as the financial model and the accurate financial projections. So here we are as legislators being asked to debate a Bill and argue the merits and points concerning the Bill in the absence of all of the details. And that is what I have a particular problem with in respect of this. Insofar as it relates to the Project Agreement, as I have indicated, as you look at the Project Agre ement (which we have all seen in this binder) which is 400, 300 pages long, there are no details as to the financial model, and there are no details as to the f inancial projections with respect to this. So I feel at a loss in order to better represent my constituents. I am supposed to be standing here debating a piece of leg-islation that I do not know all the nuances to. We have not been provided with very critical details to help us to properly dissect and articulate our position and ar-gue for or against legislation that is being asked of us to pass today in the absence of these details. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, I have already spoken to what the importance is of a recital, I have pointed you to the fact that these recitals speak to the Project Agreement and that the development takes place subject to. I have spoken to the fact that this Project Agreement, the information we have on this side, does not contain the financial projections as well as the financial model to be used with respect to this. So, quite frankly, it puts us at a great disadvantage. And I feel that I cannot properly represent some 1,200 members of my constituency with all muster, fever and intellect, because I do not have all the information in my hands. I have constituents who have been very vocal about supporting this airport deal, and I have c onstituents who have been very vocal about not supporting the airport deal for the various reasons that we have heard this evening that we will probably hear for the next couple of hours. In concert with all of these con-cerns that are being raised, many of them, whether they represent the people for or the people against, our constituents have all said the same thing, But you don’t have all the details. How are you going to go up there and articulate and argue on our behalf, when you don’t even have the . . . it’s almost like you are fighting blindly. I was having dinner recently with someone, and wearing my legal hat. They had a question co ncerning the small print of a telephone contract. And they were talking about they went somewhere and they were roaming, and so- and-so’s phone got stuck with the magnanimous bill. They asked if they had to pay it. And I said, Well, yes. Did you read the terms of the contract? [They replied] Well, no, no, no. I didn’t read it. That’s in small print. The reality is, you are signing a contract. Most of us would not enter into a contract without first reading it. Right? That’s trite law. That is just common sense. In fact, there is an expression in law that says, Let the buyer beware. If you are entering into a contract, and you have signed it, you are going to be hard pressed to try to get out of the contract by virtue of the fact that you did not read the terms. Sorry. That’s on you. So, I am using that as an analogy. Fast forward to what we are debating today. We are now be-ing asked to review and approve legislation, a Bill, when we do not have all the terms. I am certain that there is nobody in this Honourable Chamber who would enter into a loan agreement, or a mortgage agreement, something that has financial implications, without reading the terms to see what the interest rates are, how much is the principal payment, what are the terms of the loan, et cetera. Nobody is going to do that in this day and age, right? No sound person, in any event. The challenge we have is that I do not feel like I have the ability to properly participate in this debate and dissect the Project Agreement in the absence of the financial . . . the very, very critical information that we need, so that we can see what the projections are. When I look through this document and I see all the blanks, and the question mark, blank, blank, blank, blank, blank, it is like, really? I appreciate that we were supplied with this much, but the meat and potatoes are missing. And I feel at a disadvantage, Madam Deputy Speaker, to be standing here on b ehalf of the 1,200 constituents that I represent in the absence of all of the meat and potatoes needed in order for me to fully and properly articulate their concerns and protect their interests. And for that, I apologise to them. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to the Bill before us? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 36. You have the floor. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This debate, predictably, has taken a turn for the …
Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to the Bill before us? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 36. You have the floor. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This debate, predictably, has taken a turn for the worse. It did so early today when the complaint was made, as has been indicated by my learned friend and colleague, Ms. Wilson, in her last point made, that we are debating without the proper infor-mation before us. It has taken a turn for the worse for those reasons. And I dare say, Madam Deputy Speaker, that had we had the financial model before us, the character of this debate, the content of this debate would have shaped the contribution from all of the Members of the Government, all of which have been supportive, but woefully un- substantive. I say that with a much vigour and commitment as I can muster. I say they have lacked substance because I have monitored them and listened to them carefully. And they all come down to, I support this Bill. We support this Bill . . . I will say the backbench has spoBermuda House of Assembly ken for the UBP, the Independent Member who spoke for the OBA, the Independent Member and any Minister, two Ministers who have spoken, the un - substantiveness of it has been this claim that we need a new airport. Well, that is not an argument of any substance. Members of the Progressive Labour Party accept and recognise that we need a new airport, and we have been struggling to point the way forward, shine the light upon alternatives to a new airports. Mr. Craig Mayor has done it with the focus. Mr. Burchall, the eminent journalist and commentator of this Bill, ad nausea, has offered alternatives. So, my main point: The absence of the financial modelling, whether it embarrassed the Minister of Finance or not by confirming that the Leader of the Opposition had to project as the dividend profit levels that the PLP and commentators, Mr. Burchall amongst them, Mr. Mayor amongst them, Members of the O pposition amongst those, had to project an estimate. But if we had complete confirmation with the black and white figures it might have changed your speech, Madam Deputy Speaker, I say with respect, and the speeches that are to come and the Independent Member. This is the complaint which we say was the basis of our privilege motion earlier today. So, there was something very, very wrong, something very concerning that we have had to go this way. This debate has become one that is a bi t scattered. We are struggling to define it and put it in the right frame. But it is because of that central el ement of omission. And that is a tragedy for democr acy. What is the context, then, of this Airport Bill discussion? In many ways the context is 2012, the general election victory of the OBA, the promises of 2,000 jobs, debt management and fiscal management of the debt that they faced after the economic storm that the world faced, and which Bermuda was part of, and the resulting fiscal challenges that we faced; transparency in Government and avoiding corruption. Now, that was the frame that I say is part of this context. Five years on . . . we have marched five swift years on, and here we are today. And the OBA has not produced any of these three fronts. And there are others. It reminds me of my good friend, Mr. Julian Hall (maybe we were at university) who spoke in some discussion about the elephant giving birth. And the elephant strained and strained and strained. In expectation we all watched. And it gave birth to a mouse. The proposed delivery, the expected delivery, the promised delivery of the OBA party has been no-ble. Five years. We are now in the dying embers of this administration before the next election, and they have just produced a mouse. And the mouse is still coming. The eyes of this mouse began to be seen when we had to go through and suffer through Jetgate and the resignations of premiers of this country. Imm i-gration- gate on the lawn . . . there have been so many missteps, all targeted at the delivery of the promise in 2012. And today there is still this developing birth, with this awful, awful excuse for democracy, of this House being asked to debate one of the most monumentally large infrastructure projects without all of the infor-mation. It is crass and it is not good enough. This is not the way we should be doing things. As they say, this is not the law of the Persians and the Medes. This is just not it. Part of the problem then, and part of the co ntext, doubling to the context of the 2012 election prom ises of the incumbent and sitting Government was this approach, We can do whatever we want. That was the context of miscalculations, of breaching of the Ministerial Code of Conduct, breaching of F inancial Instructions, breaching of rules about how you should travel, not on your own, but with civil servants, so that you have levels of transparency about your business. To some extent it may have been newness in the job. But many, I believe, just felt, We can take these jaunts and talk to people about major contracts with the Government , who happen to be persons who are going to bid for the contract. These were Members of the Government doing what they thought they chose and thought they could do without anybody challenging them on it. And these kinds of starts are what have led us to this debate today. And I said so in my earlier motion. So, we have the Minister of Finance starting bad because he was woefully conflicted. Nowhere in the recent history of which I am aware has the Mini ster of Finance, the steward of the public purse, become involved as the lead minister in an infrastructure project. Why? Because the Minister of Finance must be there to guide, direct, the fiscal possibilities, outcomes bad and good, of his colleagues in the G overnment. So, if he or she is the lead minister, and issues arise, a dreadful conflict arises. And to hear the Minister of Finance today speak in terms of moving the goalposts and saying that, Oh, the current financial arrangements are lac king in that my subordinate Accountant General ought not to be telling me (the Minister of Finance —his boss) what I can and can’t do. It is remarkable that that fell from the Minister of Finance. But it points very plainly and clearly to the diagnosis of the problem faced by the Minister of Finance by putting himself in this ridiculously conflicted position. And of course he came afoul of Financial Instructions, as the Opposition has been at pains to remind him over these 27 months, over and over again. So, I listened as the persons who have stood from the Government benches, including the Ind ependent Member, alarmingly who weakly site Mrs. Gittens , and cites the personalities of the Blue Ribbon Panel. Indeed the Blue Ribbon Panel now join this cavalcade of Ministers and backbenchers and the Mrs. Gittenses of the world who are experts in tour546 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly ism. These are the characters and dramatists persona who are now making insubstantial and in- substantive endorsements of this airport project and the methodology of it. And, to a man and a woman, they are all weak. First of all, the Blue Ribbon Panel had such thin terms of reference, it is completely predicable that their outcome and findings were what they were d escribed as two days ago in the press. That is nothing to be excited about.
[Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair]
Hon. Michael J. Scott: It has not advanced, Mr. Speaker, your or the people of this country’s understanding of the goal in the way that we have com-plained the financial modelling would have. And again, I come back to it. Had we had it the debate today, I am convinced, would have different because we would have been looking at the . . . and I say, how on earth did you agree to this level of profit dividend for Aecon? We would have been asking that question. Now, I would have been pleasantly surprised if the financial modelling was reasonable and we could say we commend this financial modelling as being reasonable and fair and wise. But I know that that is a hope- over-experience type of calculation because the Minister of Finance has, as I have indicat-ed, a totally open hand as a negotiating partner, go vernment partner to this business entity, and used no levels of tension in the negotiation, or making d emands on this Aecon private entity. Aecon asked for the moon and the Minister of Finance said, The moon is yours, the sun and the stars and all there is therein. He has.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberAll of it. Hon. Michael J. Scott: All of it. This is what the debate is about, Mr. Speaker. I had the opportunity to speak to a Minister ahead of this debate. I will not identify the Minister. And we struggled to have to have a debate about why this …
All of it.
Hon. Michael J. Scott: All of it. This is what the debate is about, Mr. Speaker. I had the opportunity to speak to a Minister ahead of this debate. I will not identify the Minister. And we struggled to have to have a debate about why this airport is a good deal. And, again, because the lock step response, or position, now, of Ministers and backbenchers of the OBA, is that we are getting a new airport, nothing else matters. That was the calc ulation. Again, this is an in- substantive, inadequate le vel of scrutiny of a $250 million contract which the O pposition has been at pains to point out over the 30 - year period is a $1 billion price tag for the people of Bermuda. And while the Deputy Speaker was in the Chair I was hoping to say to her, as a good St. David’s islander, the Deputy Speaker and I, you and I are . . . you are going to leave from Hamilton Parish, I am go-ing to leave from Somerset and travel to the airport, Mr. Speaker, to catch a plane and enter Mississauga. That is where I am going to be. I will not recognise Bermuda at all. I will not. This is what this airport deal is about. Is this what we want for our people? Why? Because we are getting a new airport? This is a very high price for sewage management, which has been complained about. This is a very high price for mould management and remediation. This is a very high price for leaky roofs. It really is. I feel like I am in an alternate universe. Really, I do, when we are dealing with this in this fashion. This is not the law of the Persians and the Medes. So, is it commercially sound that the Berm udian staff are going to soon, because these are the opening gambits. How many staff are there at the moment? Is it 400 or 160? But they are going to be joined by Canadians pretty soon and very soon if this thing keeps going down the track. They are here . And they are going to come into serious conflicts. There are going to be Canadian operators, there is going to be Canadian influence, there is going to be Canadians advancing the fortunes, employment, salary and pr omotional fortunes of Canadians. And it will not be a minute before Bermudians are going to be complai ning to all the Ministers of the front bench of the OBA, and certainly through the Opposition about these diff iculties. It is not going to be long. Mr. Speaker, is it sound and efficacious that there might be the risk of dismantlement of unions? Is it sound that Bermuda is now going to, after this deal is completed, having made $50 million annually at the airport, it is now going to be made by Aecon, so we take a hit, or the loss of $50 million? And on and on it goes, with the figures. I am going to focus less on the figures and about how it is going to be impacting on just the ord inary assessment by Bermudians about this deal, be-cause that is what I think is important. So we are go-ing to be exporting profits to a foreign entity, and it is going to be issues about employment going on down there. There is going to be, as has been identified, Aecon in partnership with the Airport Authority, or going to be supporting them throughout, going up to what we were heretofore Bermudian agencies within that massive square footage, square acreage, or acreage of the airport, who had their agencies and buildings there, asking them for rent, or demanding rent. I see a dark and cloudy time coming for us on this a irport. And this is what they are doing. I heard Dr. Gibbons. And Dr. Gibbons had a role to play that is very central in this matter. I heard the Minister for Economic Development say that the Opposition are merely making this political. It certainly was not polit ical of me this morning when I said that we want documents. It was not a capricious request. It was a rea-sonable request for the advancement of democracy. It was quite reasonable. Apart from that, it was even
Bermuda House of Assembly higher than that. It was the privilege of this House to see it, so that we act wisely and appropriately. But Dr. Gibbons, the Minister of Economic Development in 2014 (or so, I have the documents), has offered a grant of a 114B licence to Skyport so that a 100 per cent ownership- owned local Ber muda company, then called Project Co, now Skyport, can operate in Bermuda as a foreign- owned beneficial owners and allow them to have the complete run of the airport land, its management, its ice rinks, its malls. I am telling you, it is going to Mississauga down there. It really is. And we are not going to appreciate it or like it, and it is a concern. It is a very serious concern. For those who are listening as to what the Opposition is talking about, we are not seeking to be political. We are able to project reasonable outcomes that we say are entirely unacceptable in this deal where the moon has been given away, the whole world has been placed in the hands of foreign entities. Mr. Speaker, I am concerned too about the Canadian hegemony that is going to accompany this deal. Hegemony means . . . we all know the meaning of it. The entry of Aecon, a Canadian entity with the power of its money and the employment power and the decision- making power, is going to produce such influence and display such authority down there that they will begin to get too big for their britches. They are going to influence our affairs, our local affairs. But we have done this in the past, Mr. Speaker, with the American bases. We even had the Canadian base. But they were kept withi n reasonable constraints. They stayed on the bases, the Americans did. They had strategic objectives to achieve as tenants of the bases. They rented our homes, of course, but they did not operate in employing Bermudians, operating desks where we have to go —forced to go, it’s our only airport, there is no second one— and buy our tickets, negotiate our fees, or negotiate our purchases of goods and services at an airport. We have never tak-en this level of hegemony from either Canadians, Bri tish, . . . only the British. The British, after all, are our administrating power. But even that has some const itutional constraints in it, until we go independent. But back to the hegemony of Canada. It is much greater than the hegemony of Canadian owner-ship of the Fairmount, for example, both the Hamilton management and the South Hampton, even though I now know that the French company has taken Fai rmount South Hampton. But I am here and bear wit-ness that also is a level of Canadian hegemony be-cause it has become a training ground, that hotel in South Hampton, for Canadians. They rush through there from Canada, Mississauga, Quebec, wherever, the entire provinces.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Michael J. Scott: Yes, my brother lives there. So they rush through there and they have a vertical path to promotion and the Bermudians watch it. They get hurt feelings. It upsets them as they go on lateral moves. That is influence, when you have the power of the purse strings and the power of management. This is what you do. The hegem ony authority ascribed now to what is contemplated in this Bill is vastly superior, and I am very concerned about it. It will produce ten-sions in our country that we otherwise would not have had. And that has not been thought about by the Gov-ernment. And the Members who has stood and said, We’re getting an airport, and that’s all that matters, do a huge disservice to what needs to be discussed in this project, what needs to be discussed and exam-ined in this project. And these are some of the issues. And I h ave not been able to identify all of them, but these are the ones which present themselves to my mind on this current surface examination. And I deeply regret that we were robbed in this House earlier today, Mr. Speaker, of the entitlement, the right and privilege of seeing the precise financial details so that we could say, Ah -ha! You have confirmed our worse fears and suspicions. Now, we really can hold the Government up to the light of scrutiny and say, ‘Can you account for this?’ and say it with convict ion because now we’ve had the actual exhibit A . But we do not have it. But it does not matter. It will all come out at some point. All will come out at some point. And so this debate has been weakened. It has been impeded as our Standing Orders indicate, and we have caused a great disservice to this nation, this small island na-tion, today by this expunging from the Appendix 29 of this important information, having struggled to get the details of the Project Agreement before Members that came begrudgingly. Insult to injury was added by keeping out what was the meat and potatoes of the Bill. So, I am concerned. I am very concerned that we have taken this path. And it has been a path that has generated public disquiet and led to the Decem-ber 2 nd tragic and terrible events. All of these things speak, are testament to the fact that this matter has started wrong and it has gone down . . . it is a train wreck in slow motion taking place before our very eyes. And I do not know why and/or how . And if I can assist the Government in re- tracking this train the O pposition Leader has given advice as to how this matter really ought to be rescued. He bears being paid atte ntion to and listened to. So, Mr. Speaker, I am unprepared and my speech would have been different today had I seen these confirmatory financial modellings as opposed to being told that I do not need the financial modellings, they are not important. I have not heard such really insulting or vacuous ducking of the issue in my exp e548 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly rience here in the House . . . or it is one for the books. I may have heard them before. So, there we are. The Government has taken this position. And I say that it will rue the day that we let this matter continue to unfold. The issues are con-sequential. The issues are extraordinarily conseque ntial and ought not to be passed off lightly, superficially, weakly, or like sheep in lock step with the Minister saying, Please stand and support this come hell or high water. It ought not to be treated this way because we have a higher standard and responsibility in this House. And today we have failed to discharge it —not for our own causes or for any faults of our own on the Opposition benches. The level of closing eyes and failure to stand up and show backbone on the part of fellow frontbench Ministers and backbenchers and the Ind ependent Member is astounding—it is absolutely astounding. The Minister of Finance’s major misstep and miscalculation was to make himself the lead Minister when he ought to have been the agent in the Government holding the line tightly on the fiscal eff icacy of this arrangement of this contract. He has not done so. He has caused a great disservice to this office, the Constitutional Office of the Minister of F inance and to his Government. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Minister of Home Affairs, Minister Gordon- Pamplin. You have the floor. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, many of the comments that I was hoping to address have been touched on in some way …
Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Minister of Home Affairs, Minister Gordon- Pamplin. You have the floor. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, many of the comments that I was hoping to address have been touched on in some way throughout the course of this debate. So for fear of repetition, I am going to take a slightly different tack. The Honourable Member who just took his seat, the Member from [constituency] 36, indicated that the debate today has been going progressively downhill. Let me say that the last four speakers came from that side. So, that might be a self -fulfilling co mment to indicate that that is the way things were go ing. Let me say, Mr. Speaker, that as we look . . . let me just correct one comment that the Honourable Member made when he said that the Finance Minister indicated that it was not important to have the financial models. I think what the Honourable Member said was that the financial models do not belong to Bermuda and therefore we were not at liberty to be able to pr esent them. Let me also say that . . . I will start out by saying that the majority, according to today’s poll, support the airport proposal. Now that is a slightly di fferent result from a poll that was taken before, and I recognise and understand that the difference is the dissemination of further information. And, yes, the— [Inaudible interjections]
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: The questi on may be completely different. But in addition there has been more information which the Opposition has asked for and the Minister has provided. Now, it may be said, Mr. Speaker, that all of this information should have been just presented up front. But there is such a thing (which had been signed) as a non- disclosure agreement. And when non-disclosure agreements are signed you have to respect the other person in the contractual arrange-ment. Because in order to be able to present information, if you have signed a non- disclosure agre ement, some of the information being proprietary, then it is important to make sure that you get the acquies-cence of the other partner in order to ensure that you can release that for what you have already signed up to say that you will not disclose. So, I think that that is important to understand. Mr. Speaker, we are debating the Airport A uthority Act tonight. And I am sure that I am going to hear support from Members Opposite because I can remember the Honourable Member from [constituency] 25, I believe it is (24 or 25, Honourable Member Scott), who has always talked about it is his idea that we ought to have an Airport Authority. So I am glad to see . . . I am certainly in anticipation of that level of support for the Bill that is coming. Let me just speak to the issue of the financial models because it reminds me, Mr. Speaker, of ma ybe two or so years ago when the Government put a bond issue forward and the Honourable Leader of the Opposition (he was not in that position then but he is now) asked whether in fact I had made any inves tment in that particular bond issue to which I responded, yes, I had. And then he asked me how much did I invest. So, I said that I thought that was out of order. I thought it was personal and I did not think it was any of his business. So, I think that that kind of speaks to the issue with respect to the financial models. There are certain things that we should not delve into because it is beyond the realm of decency to ask. The financial models . . . it is like, if I go to the Bank of HSBC and I say that I want to borrow $100 million in order to be able to build some grand mag-nanimous, you know, gigantic building that is all modern and provides all of the intricacies . . . maybe, let us see, as what we saw last night as we went down to see the opening of the Loren. I do not go there and say, Show me your financial model so that I can see whether the money that you are lending to me, that you are getting a fair return on, that you are not asking me to pay you a higher rate of return, then I am set and I am pleased to pay. So I think that when we look at demanding f inancial models that underpin an arrangement over which we do have contractual control, I do not think that that is appropriate. What the bank will say is that
Bermuda House of Assembly the arrangement between you and me is that I am going to give you “X” amount of money and in exchange for that “X” amount of money you are going to pay me a certain interest rate. And that is the ar-rangement, and that is the contract that is signed at the front end. It is not for me to go to the bank and say, Well, are you making 10 per cent off my money? Is your internal rate of return 50 per cent? What is it that I am really paying and could you not give me a better deal? That is just not the way it works. So, the internal rate of return is exactly that. It is internal. And it is what they use in determining what is acceptable to be able to offer in the contractual arrangement, but it is not something to which I would have any entit lement. And in paying back that money, should I borrow it from HSBC, Mr. Speaker, I would not be saying, Wow, all of this money is going over to Hong Kong. That is not what happens. So, if the money came out of Hong Kong through HSBC, then clearly when yo u repay it, it is going to go back to Hong Kong. So if the money is coming out of CIBC coming out of Canada, when you repay it, it is going to go back to Canada. That is just a given. So it should not be looked at as something negative that somebody who has loaned you the money to do a particular project that that fund-ing is repatriated to the place from whence it has come. That just does not seem to be an appropriate criticism in my opinion, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, let me also congratulate Aecon because knowing that they are going to put forward this particular project and be able to participate in it to the extent that they are, they actually have offered seven scholarships to some young Bermudian profes-sionals who will have the opportunity to go and li ve in various places across Canada so that they can get additional engineering and proficiency and various expertise in order to come back to this country to be able to apply their new experiences in helping to be put in the position to do something positive here at home, Mr. Speaker. I want to say thank you to them for that because they did not have to do it. We did not see any internships coming out of the DLBE [Dame Lois Browne- Evans] Building. We heard the Member opposite indicating that he had a fear that Bermudians would soon be subsumed and not be able to have employment while foreigners had that opportunity. And I remember, Mr. Speaker, the lament and the concern that was expressed towards the tail end of that project, as well as the hospital pr oject, where the finishers, who were the foreigners, were kept on because the duration of their work per-mits had not expired and therefore the Bermudians were let go when the job was winding down and the foreigners were kept on because their work permits allow ed them to continue for an “X” period of time. So, I think that what is important when we look at projects like this is to ensure that the policies and the procedures that are employed by the Depar t-ment of Immigration are such that we do not have a repet ition of that level of concern. I think that we can control things, Mr. Speaker, when we can control how work permits are given and the duration for which they are allowed to run. Now, Mr. Speaker, let me just say, we talk about whether an airport is needed. It was interesting because we have two schools of thought where the Honourable Member from [constituency] 17 indicated that this debate is not about whether or not we need an airport, but the Member from [constituency] 6 ind icated that we do not really need a new airport, we need to live within our means. And he basically said that, yes, there may be sewage problems or termite problems or leaking roofs but we have to patch it up. I understand— Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Point of order, Mr. Speaker , the Honourable Member is misleading this House.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Honourable Member — POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I did not say that at all.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Okay. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: It was said, and I apologise if it was not the Honourable Member who said that. But certainly I wrote down sewage, termites and leaky roofs and we should patch it up. So that is the comment I wrote. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. …
All right. Okay. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: It was said, and I apologise if it was not the Honourable Member who said that. But certainly I wrote down sewage, termites and leaky roofs and we should patch it up. So that is the comment I wrote.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamp lin: I said it may not have been you, and I apologise if it was not —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member speak, speak, speak — Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: It was something which I heard.
The SpeakerThe Speaker—here. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes, Mr. Sp eaker, I will. But, you know, I think what is unfortunate for us as a people, Mr. Speaker, is that we adopt a self - deprecating attitude. It is almost like any old thing is good enough for us as Bermudians …
—here. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes, Mr. Sp eaker, I will. But, you know, I think what is unfortunate for us as a people, Mr. Speaker, is that we adopt a self - deprecating attitude. It is almost like any old thing is good enough for us as Bermudians and let us patch it up. Well, we do not have the money to patch it up. And if we are going to spend $180 million to be able to patch it up, and as the Honourable Member from co nstituency 4 indicated that you patch up your knees and find out when you bend over another part of your 550 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly anatomy is showing because, you know, you can only patch but so much. I think that that is something that we have to bear in mind, something that we have to look at instead of thinking that it is okay to spend $184 million to patch something up. Listen to the people who are expert in the area . . . the manager of the airport who laments the conditions under which they have to work, the stresses that his staff is facing there and the i mpact that it has had on their health. So because the conditions under which they are working are certainly far from ideal. Now, I am not suggesting for a second that we ought to do nothing when rain is pouring in on your employees. But I am saying that there is a way of patching stuff without spending the $184 million in order to get it over the hump so at least we have some degree of sensitivity to the conditions under which people are working, Mr. Speaker . And I think that needs to be done. But as we have heard, we do not want for people to be working in mould- infested buildings. We do not want them to be working in buildings in which there is consistent sewage backup. So let us look at the finances here, Mr. Speaker —
[Inaudible interjection]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHold on minute, Member, you had your turn. You had your turn. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: Let us look very quickly at the finances, Mr. Speaker, because I think that when we look . . . and I am going to compare this with the hospital. And I know …
Hold on minute, Member, you had your turn. You had your turn.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: Let us look very quickly at the finances, Mr. Speaker, because I think that when we look . . . and I am going to compare this with the hospital. And I know Honourable Member s are going to say it is not comparable because one was put to tender and the other one was not.
I think the Honourable Finance Minister ind icated the purpose for which the route that was taken was taken. But let me just look at a building at the hospital —the Acute Care Wing—which was, accor ding to initial costs, going to be $243 [million] or $247 million (I have to remember the number). And in order for that to be built it was done by a company coming in and they took the responsibility. They carried the risk, they paid for the construction, they paid for ever ything to guarantee on time, on budget —which this pr oject is going to do: guarantee on time, on budget using somebody else’s money. But what was the result in order to be able to pay that company, because we all recognise there is no free lunch. So in order to pay that company back for the money that it expended on that particular project, Mr. Speaker, the [Bermuda] Hospitals Board was required to pay a balloon payment of $40 million at the outset and then, subsequent to that, $2.5 million per month for 30 years. That is $30 million per year for 30 years. Ignore the time value of money and the discounting that would be relating thereto. If you just look at in terms of straight dollar value, you are talking about paying $900 million over 30 years, plus the $40 million balloon payment for your $240- something million building. So at the end of the day, we are paying just under a billion dollars for the hospital. But we have a hospital. We have a hospital. What we are looking at here . . . and listening to the arguments that have been made and the contr ibutions to the debate that I have heard thus far, it is like we are taking all this revenue and we are giving it to this company and we have all these expenses that are going on there. But nowhere has it said that there is a building that is there. There is something that is being constructed. There is an asset, a real live asset, that at the end of the period of time belongs to Ber-muda. We are not giving it away to somebody. We are doing something similar that was done at the hospital in terms of ensuring that we pay back the money that somebody has taken out of their pockets in order to build the project. So does it matter whether that money goes to Canada or whether that money goes to Hong Kong? What ought to matter is that we are in the position of being able to pay back without a strain on the Consolidated Fund because the repair aspect of it, if we go that route of $184 million, hits the bottom line straight away. And I believe Members opposite do have an appreciation of the financial situation in which this Government found itself having assumed the reins of service in December of 2012. I think Members opposite would have an appreciation that there was no money left in the kitty. And, yes, our Finance Minister borrowed more money as the time went on. But the option would have been to say we will not borrow any more money. But we have an awful burgeoning civil service that we would have had to lay people off. So at some point in time you have to be pragmatic in how you manage the finances of a country, and the decision that was made was to ensure that we managed the reduction in the civil service and the costs appending thereto such that we did not have wholesale destruction of people’s lives as a result of redundancies. So you manage those processes, Mr. Speaker. And that is the route that the Government chose to take. As a result of that, we find that we have signif icant costs now to pay for the debt that we have. We have borrowed more money. Yes, we have. We have gone on a glide path using some of the recommendations from the SAGE Commission, and to some pe ople’s minds not enough, not aggressively enough, but certainly balancing what we need to do from a fiscal perspective with what we have to do from a social perspective to make sure that you do not just cut the money and say, Sorry we are not going to spend anymore. So, we have to have pragmatic decisions that enable us to balance where it is that we need to go as
Bermuda House of Assembly a country. And that is really where we are with this particular situation, Mr. Speaker. So I do not think we ought to start looking at accepting the fact that the band aids —the very expensive band aids —are appl icable in this particular instance. I am not saying there is never a time when it might be applicable. But this, I do not believe, is the time, because we do not have the money to throw away, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member from [constituency] 31 (the Honourable Member Crockwell) indicated that he listened to or he read excerpts from the presentation by Angela Gittens . And, you know, I believe the Member from [constituency] 36 basically discounted or dismissed the praise that was heaped on Ms. Gittens by the Honourable Member from [co nstituency] 31, but I think that when somebody at t heir level of expertise has a particular discipline that we do not have, I am not suggesting for one second that we give over and divest ourselves of our responsibility. But we certainly utilise the expertise that they bring to the table to give us the opportunity to understand what goes into the project. And what Ms. Gittens had indicated, if I may just go and refer, Mr. Speaker, if you will just give me one second . . . Ms. Gittens had spoken to the airport deal being creative and resourceful. And this is som ebody, as the Honourable Member Crockwell, the Honourable Member from [constituency] 31, indicated, who is at the level of excellence in her industry, the likes of which all of those people in that particular i ndustry know this particular person. It is almost like saying she is, you know, this is the president walking through, or being the guest speaker at a particular event. And when all is said and done the attendees want to be able to go and say, Mr. President, good to meet you . This is the degree of respect that is commanded by this lady, Mr. Speaker. And I do not think that her expertise needs to be dismissed. I also think that when the Honourable Member put together the Blue Ribbon Panel, the intent was not to make it political. So I do hear the criticism that came to say that the Opposition ought to have been invited to bring one or two people on board and what have you. But that is specific terms of reference and I believe to make sure that it was non- political that the Honourable Member put together a panel that was the envy of our society. They were people —you had lawyers, you had accountants, you had economists, you had people who are well -respected in our community collaborating together to look at a set of information to determine whether the Government had done what was appropriate under the circumstances. Now, there are things that they may have done differently and they have made reference to that. But what they had opined was that what was done was well done. We also see, Mr. Speaker, that there was the report that came from (what was the name of the company?) Steer Davies Gleave which spoke to the value for money for the project. Now we have heard Members today indicate what came first —did Aecon find CCC? Did CCC find Aecon? You know, which was first, the chicken or the egg? But, Mr. Speaker, once that arrangement . . . and I am not going to speak to the chronology of it because I believe that the Finance Minister has a lready done that. But once that was done, Mr. Speaker, I think it i s important to say that Steer Davies [Gleave], who have no skin in the game in terms of siding on behalf of this Government, are able to offer an independent assessment and evaluation of the project. And that independent assessment, Mr. Speaker, said that there was value for money. We want to make sure at the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, that we spend the public money well, that we are able to meet our financial commitments without putting ourselves in a worse financial hole, and by having an off -balance sheet approach this is an ideal way to be able to accomplish that. You know, there are times when governments make decisions that may or may not go down well with everybody. But I think if the intent is right then I think that we can get there. It might end up being a little more expensive, as we found out in the Berkeley Institute when that was being put up. We heard the Honourable Member indicate that the TAF was one . . . I am sorry, no, the other building, the DLBE —the TAF was [$]101 [million] and it came it at [$]98 [mi llion] and that possibly is so. But I do remember, Mr. Speaker, the day on the floor of this Honourable House when Honourable Member Dennis Lister said that the cost of that particular project was going to be $75 million— if the co ntractor was able to come in at less than $75 [million], the difference would be his profit and if it is more than $75 [million] he will eat the difference. That is a similar kind of concept that we have here, which says that if the cost of the building is higher than that which has been determined by the contract, then the contractor will eat the difference. And I think that that is the sort of thing that you want to at least ascertain at the outset what your financial responsibilities are in order to make sure that you get a good deal. Mr. Speaker, I am going to speak very briefly to my area of interest in this which has come very, very heavily . . . apart from the seven internships that we just mentioned and Members opposite kind of looked and said, Ha, you mean just seven? But these are seven young Bermudians, college university graduates, who are now having an opportunity that other-wise they may not have who will then be able to come back to Bermuda and be able to exhibit the learning that they have, the experience that they have, to bring it back. And the excellence that they have achieved will benefit us as a country, Mr. Speaker . But, I guess a month or so ago, on a parli amentary question that was tabled by the Honourable Member from constituency 13, my representative, my parliamentary representative asked the question as to 552 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly which categories of employment would be provided to the department for the new airport development pr oject. And, although the list is not exhaustive, Mr. Speaker, I think that the idea that they need things like cement concrete finishers, general labourers, drywall finishers and plasterers, electricians, carpenters, equipment operators, insulators, iron workers . . . the list goes on and on, Mr. Speaker . And f rom an employment perspective, steel workers, terrazzo tile and marble setters, mechanical and electrical systems people, telephone networks, communications, elev ators, escalators, baggage handling systems, irrigation systems, security systems. These are real opportunities for our Bermudians, Mr. Speaker . And it is my intention to ensure that as many Bermudians as possible will get these opportunities at this new airport. I believe it is important to put our people to work. I know that Members opposite have continuously thrown the barbs across the aisle to effectively say, You promised 2,000 jobs and you’ve lost “X” number and you have not produced. Mr. Speaker, I mentioned this morning that through Job Board for Bermudian jobs from January 2016 —and this is because the system has changed to allow us to be able to account for actual jobs, where people have been placed off Job Board —there were 936 positions. So that is nothing to sneeze at. And I will ensure, Mr. Speaker, that before any work permits are given that we have the necessary trainings in place so that our people are ready at the time that this project comes on board. There are some jobs that you do not need a whole lot of training for, like maybe a labourer’s helper or something like that. However, Aecon has specifically said that they are concerned about the OSHA [Occupational Safety and Health Administration] regulations. Ther efore, all workers are going to be required to have to obtain that level of, not just excellence, but proficiency with what is required for occupational health and saf ety. These are things that we will be starting the train-ing for so that at the point in time that ground is broken, and all is said and done, our workers —our Bermudian workers —not only have the initial opportunities, but have ongoing opportunities to ensure that they are able to be employed. Mr. Speaker, that is our commitment. That is what we are looking for. And while the Members op-posite have spoken about where the revenue is going , and w e are not getting revenue that we used to get. Well, we are going to get an airport that we did not have, as well. So while you are looking at what the costs are and where the revenues are going, you cannot lose sight of the fact that the building, the asset, has a cost, and nowhere in the models that came out today did I see that this cost has been effectively taken into consideration. I just wanted to make sure, Mr. Speaker, that I contributed to this debate because from an immigr ation prospective, I believe that Members can be com-forted in knowing that we are working assiduously within the department to ensure—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou have three minutes. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: And I only need one more second, Mr. Speaker. We are working assiduously within the d epartment to ensure that we do our level best to give our Bermudian workers as many opportunities as possible. This is one, Mr. Speaker. There …
You have three minutes. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon- Pamplin: And I only need one more second, Mr. Speaker. We are working assiduously within the d epartment to ensure that we do our level best to give our Bermudian workers as many opportunities as possible. This is one, Mr. Speaker. There are others coming down the pipeline. I lament the length of time that it has taken for us to reach this stage. But having gotten to where we are, Mr. Speaker, I am looking forward with enthusiasm, with excitement, and with anticipation for the next step where our Bermudian workers will have a great opportunity to continue to put bread on their tables so we as a Government can show that we are concerned in putting our people to work. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 29, MP Zane De Silva. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, have you heard that saying, Throw the shovel away?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI think so. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes. I think we have all heard that. But you know what, Mr. Speaker, speaker after speaker after speaker, in particular the last speaker on that side, should have thrown the shovel away a long time ago because it is obvious …
I think so. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes. I think we have all heard that. But you know what, Mr. Speaker, speaker after speaker after speaker, in particular the last speaker on that side, should have thrown the shovel away a long time ago because it is obvious to a blind man to a deaf man, to anyone that is listening to them tonight . . . Mr. Speaker, this is the report we were given two weeks ago. How many of them have read it? Mr. Speaker, I will tell you what. I have read it. I have read it. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: I have read it. And I will tell you what. It is obvious to a duck that they have not read it. Obvious to a duck they have not read it, Mr. Speaker. And, you know, it disappoints me because I spent my valuable time (as many of our colleagues on this side did) reading this. Well, Mr. Speaker, they say it is a thousand pages. Well, guess what? Great report . . . does not even have any numbers on the pages. Does not even have any numbers on it! I wonder if they know that? So, if you are reading through it and you are looking at it, and it says, Refer to Schedule B, point 64 point 2. You have to go looking for it, Mr. Speaker. You have to go looking for it! So instead of
Bermuda House of Assembly spending, maybe, a week on it, you have to spend about 10 days. But, of course, it is obvious that many of them did not read it at all.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: And I will get to it, Mr. Speaker. Disappointed! And you talk about how good the airport is, and the Honourable Member who just took her seat talked about jobs. Jobs for Bermudians. She has not read that section where labourers have to have 480hours of experience and they have to have classroom experience.
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Mr. Speaker, classroom experience? Do you know what that is, Mr. Speaker? If you read this, it is about five pages of qualifications, the hours needed, the work experience needed. You know what that tells me? That tells me that this is built for non- Bermudian workers. So I would suggest to the Members on the other side to read that document. Well, too late now, but . . . the Bill will pass tonight because they have the numbers. But what a disappointment, Mr. Speaker. What a disappointment!
[Phone rings]
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Mr. Speaker, the Honour able Member Pat Gordon- Pamplin who just took her seat—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCan I just ask everybody to turn off their phones? Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would appreciate that too.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerEverybody, please turn them off. I want to hear MP De S ilva— Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe Speaker—not some reggae music. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Mr. Speaker, the other thing that the Honourable Member who just took her seat [said], which just blew my mind, $180 million to patch up—$180 million to patch up! So she has not read that document either. Mr. Speaker, you …
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThe whole nine yards! [Crosstalk] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: I could talk about it for the next 20 minutes, but I won’t. But it is obvious to a duck that she has not read the reports. Now, Mr. Speaker, you know that I know a li ttle bit …
The whole nine yards! [Crosstalk] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: I could talk about it for the next 20 minutes, but I won’t. But it is obvious to a duck that she has not read the reports. Now, Mr. Speaker, you know that I know a li ttle bit about construction —$180 million to put on a band aid. They use d that word all day today. We will put a “band aid” on it. A band aid on it! Well, I will tell you what, Mr. Speaker, it is amazing how . . . you know, they say (what is it?), What comes around goes around. Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member who just took her seat talked about, We don’t want people in mould invested buildings. Oh, my gracious. Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me, Mr. Speaker? We just moved a whole school from one end of the Island to the other because of mould.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWhere is the Premier’s office? [Crosstalk] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Where is the Premier’s office? And why? Oh, Mr. Speaker! I tell you what . . . Mr. Speaker, you know what? If the people of Berm uda are listening today, they are saying, Well, now here comes …
Where is the Premier’s office?
[Crosstalk]
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Where is the Premier’s office? And why? Oh, Mr. Speaker! I tell you what . . . Mr. Speaker, you know what? If the people of Berm uda are listening today, they are saying, Well, now here comes . . . this is the con job of all con jobs. I will tell you why . It started as a con job and it is going to finish as a con job. Let me declare my interest, Mr. Speaker. For those Members who do not know, I have bid on some work . . . or my brother has, down at the airport, se veral million dollars. If anybody should sit down, it is me. I should probably sit here and say, Let the airport go. I may get $5 –$6–$8 million worth of work tomorrow. But, Mr. Speaker, it is not good for our country. It is not good for our people. But, Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed. Then, Mr. Speaker, my honourable colleague from constit uency 22, Dr. Grant Gibbons, had a lot to say about the hospital. Hmm. Well, let us talk about that for a minute, Mr. Speaker. The Honourable Member said that no information was given out, [only] two pages he said . . . a statement that I made when I was Health Mini ster. Only two pages. Well, Mr. Speaker, you know why I did not have to say too much? Because everything was put out to tender. And, the chairman of the Blue Ribbon Panel was the one who ran that whole project. Malcolm Butterfield. He was the one who said, This is the person that should build it, and this is why. And they used the same fellow that he is criticizing me and the hospital board to head up his Blue Ribbon commi ttee. I will say, Mr. Speaker! I’ll say, My, my, my . My, my, my, M r. Speaker. The same fellow that they put up on a pedestal as the Chairman of this Blue Ribbon committee, is the same guy that headed up the KP MG group for the hospital job. My, my, my, Mr. Speaker. 554 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly But, Mr. Speaker, let’s talk about the hospital real quick because I have got some other things that are very important. But the hospital, let’s remember. It went out to tender and the operations, to this day, are still controlled by Bermudians. BHB [Bermuda Hosp itals Board] controls the dollars. You know, the Hon-ourable Finance Minister is always talking about foreign exchange, always talking about foreign exchange, but guess what is going to happen. Most of that money that is collected is going to be, Adios, out of here! As you know, the Bermuda dollar . . . now, Dr. Grant Gibbons can correct me if I am wrong, but I think the Bermuda dollar circulates about nine times before it goes out. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Nine times. He is a banker, I will take my seat if he wants to correct me, but I think it is about nine times. But, Mr. Speaker, for someone who touts foreign exchange, boy oh boy. Are we seeing some change outs. So, Mr. Speaker, when you talk about the hospital that is run and operated and owned, and the dollars are controlled by our people, you cannot compare that with the airport. Apples and oranges. Now, Mr. Speaker, I was also very disappointed in the le arned Member from constituency 31 tonight. Why? Well, he said that if it was put out to tender, he does not think there would be very many bidders. We would not have many bidders. Are you kidding me, Mr. Speaker? Are you kidding me? To make a statement like that, a learned Member of this House? I tell you what. You put it out to tender. When that hospital was put out to tender we were inundated with bids, Mr. Speaker. And we would have been i nundated [now]. The other thing the Honourable and Learned Member said was, What about the risk of poor Aecon? I will tell you what, Mr. Speaker. Give me this deal, I will not put $69 million in; I will put $100 million in. Give me that 30 -year deal. Risk? There is not any risk in this deal, Mr. Speaker, for Aecon. None! Not when you have a Government that is guaranteeing everything is going to be sorted out for you, Mr. Speaker. None.
[Crosstalk]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. All right, Honourable Members, we can have only one speaker. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: And the other thing the Honourable Member from constituency 31 said was, This is the best option. Mr. Speaker, the last I checked it was the only option! How can you say …
All right. All right, Honourable Members, we can have only one speaker.
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: And the other thing the Honourable Member from constituency 31 said was, This is the best option. Mr. Speaker, the last I checked it was the only option! How can you say it is the best option when we only had one? [Crosstalk] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: What? Are we stupid up here? Are the people of Bermuda stupid? All this stuff that has been talked about tonight . . . I cannot believe it. All that side and the Independent Member down that side, whom I have a lot of respect for . . . I thought he was pr etty smart. But he said some things tonight, Mr. Speaker, that blew my mind. That’s the best option that we have for our people. Mm-mm. Now, Mr. Speaker, because I know that time is going to fly by quick, but let’s just do a little bac ktracking. The Honourable Member, the Finance Mini ster, came in at a great time because, Mr. Speaker, that is exactly where I want to start. You know, Mr. Speaker, 2014, as you will know, on the 7 th of Nove mber, we had the Throne Speech. And in the Throne Speech, as we all know, the Government lays out their plans for the next year. Not a word was men-tioned, not one word in the Throne Speech was men-tioned about this airport. Biggest deal in Bermuda’s history —not a word! Not a word in the Throne Speech, Mr. Speaker. And, the Honourable Minister started having his meet-ings in May that year. And if he would like a little r eminder, I have the Hansard report here from May. Okay? So here we have the biggest deal in our history and it is not in the Throne Speech. That should make the OBA backbenchers think a little bit, let alone us on this side. The biggest project in our history and it is not in there. Why, Mr. Speaker? Why? Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Minister of F inance also confirmed in his first announcement that it included the Causeway. Mr. Speaker, what hap-pened? Well, I will tell you what happened. About three weeks later the Honourable Minister, after he made his first announcement, the cost of the project was $200 million. A couple of months later he came up here to the House, the price had risen to $255 mi llion, in just a short couple of months. And guess what? The Causeway was gone. So what happened? What happened, Mr. Speaker? So you see, now, here we are at the start of this project and there is a red flag over here, and there is another red flag over there. Then, Mr. Speaker, we get another surprise. Several months later the price has gone up to $267 million. And still no Causeway. And, Mr. Speaker, you will know, earlier today when I drew a point of order on Dr. Gibbons, you said, Zane, you will get your turn. And now here is my turn.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI said, Honourable Member. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes, you said Honourable Member . Yes, you said Honourable Member — [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva : Yes, I will not put that word in your mouth, Mr. Speaker. Bermuda House of Assembly [Laughter] Hon. Zane …
I said, Honourable Member. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes, you said Honourable Member . Yes, you said Honourable Member — [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva : Yes, I will not put that word in your mouth, Mr. Speaker.
Bermuda House of Assembly [Laughter]
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: But you did. You said, Honourable Member, you will get your turn. And now it is my turn. And Dr. Gibbons confirmed that the new price today is $302 million.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWow! Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: So we have gone from $200 [million], to $255 [million], to $267 [million], to now $302 [million]. So, since November 2014, the price of the airport, less the Causeway, has gone from $200 million to $302 million.
The Hon. Dr. E. Grant GibbonsYes. The early price probably did not include the demolition part on the airport and I think that probably makes the difference. [Crosstalk] The Spe aker: All right. Thank you. [Crosstalk]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Carry on, Member. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: That was poor. That was poor, Mr. Speaker. That was poor. But I understand it. The Honourable Minister —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI think . . . just a minute. I think members in the audience . . . I have said this before. If you cannot sit there and not react to what is said, you are going to be asked to leave. If you cannot sit there and watch what …
I think . . . just a minute. I think members in the audience . . . I have said this before. If you cannot sit there and not react to what is said, you are going to be asked to leave. If you cannot sit there and watch what is going on, if that is difficult, then, rather than having me ask you to leave, then you should leave. And I think you know who you are. Carry on, Honourable Member. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I understand the Honourable Dr. Gibbons, he wants to do a point of order because they are probably embarrassed. They are embarrassed because someone shone a bright light on the little doozy -doozy that they have got going on, Mr. Speaker. Okay? Starting at $200 million and it is now $302 [million], less a Causeway. Now, Mr. Speaker, we talk about transparency. I have to give them that because they did not start at $200 [million] and then all of a sudden when it is finished it is $300 [million]. It has been going up all along so I guess they could say, I told you so. But, Mr. Speaker, the other thing that is of note is the Bermudian jobs have changed. Every two minutes the Bermudian jobs are changing. So why do I say that? Well, in the first announcement that the Finance Minister made, it was going to be 75 per cent of the jobs would be Bermudian. Then the next minute it is 60 per cent, Mr. Speaker. Every time we turn around something on this job is changing. Mr. Speaker, I would like the Minister, hopefully when he wraps up (or maybe someone on the other side), can tell us exactly how many Bermudian jobs that we are talking about. Because in 2015 it was 450, last month it was 240, and in yesterday’s Royal Gazette , that full -page ad that they paid for, it was 300 Bermuda jobs. So, 450, 240, and 300. It is like pin the tail donkey time. Okay, let us see. What are going to tell the Bermuda public today? Let’s close our eyes and pin the tail on the donkey. Okay, it is 300 jobs today. How about the price for the airport? Let’s pin the tail up here . Ooh. It is 267 today.
[Laughter] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Mr. Speaker, you will know that we have had a lot of turmoil over this project. Why has the Finance Minister never made a presentation to the unions? Never made a presentation to the un-ions! Why is that? I know he went to City Hall and gave his Members one. He went to Queen’s Club and gave them one. I do not know if he went out to Spa nish Point and gave them one. He was going to all these organisations but the biggest organisations in the country, the unions, he did not give a presentation to. Even after December 2 nd you would have thought, Wow, we have got a reprieve. We have a whole month before we are going back. [Clap] Let me get a hold of the unions and let’s see if we can work this thing out. Nope. Nope. No. Now, Mr. Speaker, one thing I had in my note, I do not know if my Honourable Leader got a hold of it, but let me say this. We are going to spend $302 mi llion now on this airport. And we have heard from several Members from the OBA Government today sa ying that it is important. It [means] jobs. We have to worry about hurricanes. We have to worry about sur ges. We have to worry about this . . . it is not up to 556 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly code, it is this that and the other and everything else, Mr. Speaker. I will tell you what. What is the sense of having a $300 million airport, to deal with a Cate gory 5 hurricane, when we all know a Category 5 hurr icane is going to blow that Causeway straight out through the pylons. And then you have Sir John Swan, Mr. Speaker, who . . . I was wondering where he has been hiding. Right? Because certainly . . . certainly, Mr. Speaker, before the election in 2012, he was in that newspaper every week talking about the debt. I am wondering what rock he crawled out from under to make this statement, Mr. Speaker. And with your indulgence, let me see. Let me just get my glasses, Mr. Speaker. Give me one second. Here you go, Mr. Speaker. Look, Sir John Swan. 4“I determined that it was in terrible shape, as it was at high risk for winds and at greater risk from hur-ricanes. If we were to experience a major hurricane that did irreparable damage to the airport terminal, the whole of Bermuda would suffer because international business” (check this out) “international business would cease to conduct its business from Bermuda. Tourism from an airline perspective would cease and locals would not be able to travel from destinations outside of Bermuda.” Well, I’ll be, Mr. Speaker. This is Sir John Swan, the former PLP [sic] Premier of this country. [Laughter]
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberUBP. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Sorry . . . Oh, I do not know. They change their colours so . . . look, I do not know what they are going to be. I do not know what they are going to be at the end of this …
UBP. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Sorry . . . Oh, I do not know. They change their colours so . . . look, I do not know what they are going to be. I do not know what they are going to be at the end of this year, Mr. Speaker. If it will be OBA, UBP, PBP, O . . . U . . . you know? [Inaudible interjections and laughter] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes! So, Mr. Speaker, can you believe . . . this is almost like scaremongering again. You know, if a hurricane comes, international business is going to leave Bermuda? Mr. Speaker, okay, where are they going to go? Let’s see now. Maybe they will go to Chile. Oh, I guess they have had an earthquake; they will hang around for a little bit, huh? And if they go up there to Hong Kong or Thailand, out that way, and have a ts unami, they will leave there too, won’t they Mr. Speak-er? Come on, Mr. Speaker, come on. Scaremongering . . . those days are over. I am telling you, it upset me today. It really upset me today.
4Royal Gazette 9 February 2017 Now, Mr. Speaker, the other thing I think I have to mention too is that the Honourable Member . . . how much time do I have left?
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Eleven minutes. Beautiful. I think I could squeeze it in. Mr. Speaker, the Finance Minister said that when he took over he was dealt a very bad hand. The debt . . . and the Honourable Dr. Gibbons says it is true. I am glad he is piping up. Because you know he said we left the country with this huge debt. What a bad hand he was dealt. What a bad hand. Well, Mr. Speaker, you know what? We left a debt of $1.1 billion, when they took over. And we took 14 years to amass it. And let me say this first before adding the second part. Had the UBP, which Dr. Gib-bons was a part of for 30 years , had attended to a lot of the infrastructure issues, some of the buildings . . . some are that a lot older than the airport, our social programmes . . . you know, when we brought in F utureCare, we brought in day care for all of our strug-gling people. If they would have done all that, Mr. Speaker, I have a feeling they would have had a little bit of a larger debt too. But, of course, they did not care about all of that. They wanted to show, Look, you know what? Here we are, we got a nice little surplus going. The country is in good shape. So now, Mr. Speaker, when we take over we have to fix it all. And we fixed it good too. Oh, yes. [Inaudible interjection] [Gavel]
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Oh, yes, we did, Mr. Speaker. We fixed it. We gave free education. We gave free buses. We gave free land tax. We gave F utureCare. We gave some of our seniors that could not . . . we were hauling them down at the hospital like animals. You remember, Mr. Speaker. First thing they did when they got in, of course, was take that luxury away from our seniors, where they cannot go see their doctor of choice. Very caring, yes . . . Minister , Atto rney General, T. G. Moniz shuts off the water for the people at Dockyard. That is how caring they are, Mr. Speaker. So let me just continue on that track for a moment. So, remember, Mr. Speaker, when we talk about what you can do for your people and how you get it and . . . the Honourable Finance Minister says what a debt we left them in. Can you imagine if the Progressive Labour Party would have won the election in 2012, and ‘Premier ’ Burt would have come up here and said, Look, I’ll tell you what. I am going to borrow $800 million, it is going to take care of the def-icit for the next three years. Can you imagine what the people of this country would have said?
Bermuda House of Assembly [Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Right? And guess what? It was supposed to last three years. Great concept! Man, that guy is smart. He’s got it. It was gone in 18 months. Had to borrow another $200 million. Here it is, Mr. Crystal Ball.
[Laughter]
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Oh, yes. Y es, Mr. Speaker. Can you imagine if a PLP Government added a billion dollars in three and a half years? A billion!
[Inaudible interjections]
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: And, we understand, Mr. Speaker, they are struggling to get across the finish line for March 31 st. They are struggling to get across. So, Mr. Speaker, when I hear talk like that . . . now, let’s talk about one more thing. Morgan’s Point. Another one, Finance Minister. We squeezed it out of them in one of the parliamentary questions. Well, I gave them a $125 million letter of comfort. By the next week it went up to what? Up to $165 [million], didn’t it? In one week it went up $40 million. Now, I do not have a problem with that conception, Mr. Speaker. Support developers. Let them get going. Put some shovels in the ground. But be able to peel it back. And do you remember, I think it was Arch I nsurance announced $5 million investment up there. And then of course it slipped out. Minister Richards said, Oh, but we guaranteed it. We guaranteed it . Mr. Speaker, let me finish on this note. Dr. Brown went to the BIU banquet in 2013 and he suggested to everybody in the room, especially us PLP folk, and said, Look, you know what? You guys better try to get the Government back as soon as you can. Because if you wait five years, there ain’t going to be nothing left. And, Mr. Speaker, this is a prime example of it. Thank you very much.
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, MP De Silva. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 28, MP Jeff Sousa.
Mr. Jeff SousaAnd good evening to those who may be in the listening audience. Mr. Speaker, I have listened this evening, particularly to the last speaker, the Member who just took his seat from constituency 29. Sadly, Mr. Speaker, much of this talk this evening in this debate boils down to the …
And good evening to those who may be in the listening audience. Mr. Speaker, I have listened this evening, particularly to the last speaker, the Member who just took his seat from constituency 29. Sadly, Mr. Speaker, much of this talk this evening in this debate boils down to the fact that when the Progressive Labour Party were in Government, they knew that we needed a new airport. But the Progressive Labour Party could not get it done. They spent millions of dollars on plans for the airport. They looked at a $500 million project for the airport, but they could not get it done. The OBA Government came into power with the objective to put our country back on track. And that is exactly what we have done and what we will continue to do. I heard the Member who just took to his feet say last year in the House of Assembly, We want to see the OBA successful. We want to see them create hotel s. We want to see them create jobs. We don’t mind if [we] remain in the Opposition for the next (I believe he said) 10 or 15 years.
An Hon. Member An Hon. Member[He said] 20 years.
Mr. Jeff Sousa[It was] 20 years. As the Honourable Member says. This is what he said. Anybody can go back and look in Hansard. That is what will take place. And I am glad you said that. That is what will take place. Because the people of Bermuda will see that the …
[It was] 20 years. As the Honourable Member says. This is what he said. Anybody can go back and look in Hansard. That is what will take place. And I am glad you said that. That is what will take place. Because the people of Bermuda will see that the One Bermuda Alliance Government has done exactly what they set out to do. When the Member who just took to his feet talked about hiring Bermudians on various projects, does he forget when he sat on the board of Port Royal Golf Course and there was 25, 30 [Filipinos] laying on top of each in the club house? That the hand- selected gentleman he had run the golf course [was] there because he refused to work with Bermudi-ans? Does he have selective memory, Mr. Speaker? Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Yes, Honourable Member. POINT OF ORDER Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: The Honourable Member is certainly misleading the House because, Mr. Speaker, while we did have some Filipino workers out there, we did also hire 12 Bermudians who were out of work.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Thank you, Member.
Mr. Jeff SousaMr. Speaker, lest that Member can— ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER HOUSE VISITOR
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI just want to also . . . just one second, Honourable Member. I should have done so before you started to speak, but I recognise in the audience Senator Renee Ming. 558 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly [Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on, please. [Continuation of Second Reading debate on Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017]
Mr. Jeff SousaMr. Speaker, unless the Member who just took his seat can refute what I just said, that the gentleman who was in charge of Port Royal Golf Course at the time did not like working with, and a lmost refused to, work with Bermudians. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silv …
Mr. Speaker, unless the Member who just took his seat can refute what I just said, that the gentleman who was in charge of Port Royal Golf Course at the time did not like working with, and a lmost refused to, work with Bermudians.
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silv a: Oh, I can disagree with that. You want me to do a point of order on it?
Mr. Jeff SousaYes, do a point of order. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Okay. All right. He wants it; I will give it to him. Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGo ahead. POINT OF ORDER Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Mr. Speaker, that is totally untrue and unfounded. Unless — [Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust a minute. Otherwise you will not get an opportunity to speak. Yes. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, that is totally untrue and unfounded. And if the Honourable Member has some evidence to show that, I will gladly accept it. He can table …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerOkay. Carry on please, MP Sousa.
Mr. Jeff SousaThank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in Bermuda’s history there has not been a capital project — Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHe has not said anything yet, Honourable Member. [Laughter] Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Point of order.
Mr. Jeff SousaWhat is the point . . . [Inaudible interjections and laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, let him finish what he is saying. [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Jeff SousaMr. Speaker, I didn’t even make a statement. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: [Standing Order] 19(7), Mr. Speaker —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust— Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: —the [Standing O rders] state that a Member shall not read his speech.
Mr. Jeff SousaMr. Speaker, as I was saying, there has not been a project in Bermuda’s history that has been as open and transparent as the project we are debating here tonight. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Jef f
SousaI will challenge anybody in this Chamber to tell me where there has been a project that has been more open or transparent as the project as we are talking about tonight. [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Jeff SousaAnd goodness gracious, Mr. Speaker, we are still looking for facts on the hospital. The Member who was the former Minister of Health, we are still looking for facts on the hospital. Bermuda House of Assembly And, again, when you have . . . I serve on another committee in …
And goodness gracious, Mr. Speaker, we are still looking for facts on the hospital. The Member who was the former Minister of Health, we are still looking for facts on the hospital.
Bermuda House of Assembly And, again, when you have . . . I serve on another committee in another place, and when you listen to the General Manager of the airport, Mr. Aaron A dderley, and the other gentleman who is in charge of the physical plant down at the airport, and they tell the people of Bermuda that the right alternative is to have a new airport versus spending (I believe he said) $180 million to patch it up, which that team is proposing as the right way to go . . . come on. We on this side have always been open and transparent since day one. And how people can say we have not, is absolutely l udicrous. On our side it has been all about trust, Mr. Speaker. And quite clearly, Mr. Speaker, in closing I would like to say that we have seen recently where Cond é Nast, Ebony magazine, Lonely Planet, and numerous other magazines . . . oh, there was another one today. I think it was . . . I cannot remember the name. There was another one that came out today. And they are telling the world that Bermuda is the place that you want to come in 2017. And not just for the America’s Cup. Bermuda is the place you want to come. So, naturally, not all seven billion people in the world are going to come, but you are going to have lots of people come to Bermuda. And if we are looking at being a first -class tourist destination, we do want to have our first impression and our last impression be-ing a good one. And I tell the people of Bermuda, honestly, with all this praise going on in all these magazines all over the world, don’t you think that our Bermuda will continue to rise up, and we need to be prepared for it? And that is exactly what we are doing. Yesterday you saw a hotel open up down at Pink Beach. We see all of the work that is taking place at Morgan’s Point. There will be a new hotel built in St. George’s. There is so much going on in Bermuda. As the Member from constituency 29 knows, because he is working on many of these projects. Honestly, you would have to be blind, deaf, and dumb not to realise the amount of work that is taking place, the growth that is taking place, bus inesses are growing, entrepreneurship is rabid in this country. I know, I mean, I was happy to see in the N ational Training Board magazine that was out, there was a guy, Ty Berkley, there and I see that he did some seafaring and some captaincy work. And he has been working with S ousas for the last three months. There is a lot of new growth taking place. I know this first hand, Mr. Speaker. And I just want to say in closing that the One Bermuda Alliance will continue to do the people’s work for the benefit of all Bermuda. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe Speakerright. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 13, MP Diallo Rabain.
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainThank you, Mr. Speaker. I did not want to start off with this, but you know in listening to the last speaker go after my friend over here about Port Royal, I just have to make sure that the public knows that this Member is the Chai rman of the …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I did not want to start off with this, but you know in listening to the last speaker go after my friend over here about Port Royal, I just have to make sure that the public knows that this Member is the Chai rman of the National Training Board who brought in national certification for landscape gardeners and has not checked any of the 200- plus permits that have been issued since he has been the Chairman of the National Training Board for certification.
[Inaudible interjections]
Some Hon. Member s: Ooh.
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainSo he talks about saving Bermuda jobs, but what has he been doing? So, Mr. Speaker, we are finally here. We are finally here doing this debate. I do not think that the One Bermuda Alliance realises how important today is in relation to December 2 nd. But, Mr. Speaker, …
So he talks about saving Bermuda jobs, but what has he been doing? So, Mr. Speaker, we are finally here. We are finally here doing this debate. I do not think that the One Bermuda Alliance realises how important today is in relation to December 2 nd. But, Mr. Speaker, this airport deal represents a larger picture than I think Members opposite are even willing to look at. What this deal demonstrates, Mr. Speaker, and what the people of Bermuda have shown us, is the growing lack of trust that has steadily grown in this administr ation from day one. Mr. Speaker, the Finance Minister has pushed this agenda from the very beginning, shrouded in s ecrecy. And his very actions have led to the upheaval in this Island that has seen race relations dwell to the depths that we have not seen in decades. But instead of claiming this responsibility, all we hear from them is, It’s your fault. This is why the people are not listening to us. It’s your fault. Instead of embracing their shortcomings, they just want to blame it on everyone else. But w e have seen this story already. Mr. Speaker, it is a forgone conclusion that a new airport is needed or the present airport needs to completely upgraded. That is not what is in dispute, despite the alternative facts that we keep hearing from the other side. None of us dispute that we need to fix this airport or put a new one down there. But, Mr. Speaker, this deal has been seen as shady [and] has been seen as underhanded from the beginning. There has been lots of evidence put forward that despite it, all we hear is, Don’t look at that, this is what’s really going on. Instead of being forthright, instead of being upfront, the Government has decided to take a path that has led people to be more and more suspicious of their motives. And as the days, the weeks, and the months have gone by that is all we have seen. Instead of being upfront with this deal and letting us know all of the information ahead of time, it has been denial, denial, denial. Then all of a sudden someone gets caught, [and] a little bit of information gets put out there, then denial, denial, denial. Someone gets caught, information gets put out . . . that is all we have 560 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly seen. And when that is the only thing you have seen, what else have you got to hold your hat to? What is wrong with laying out the concrete details from day one? I will tell you what is wrong, Mr. Speaker. In their zealousness to try their best to figure out how to come back from their broken promise of 2,000 jobs, they have rushed into a deal. They will never admit that they should have done more due dil igence before they rushed into it because if they had, we would not be hearing the terms of the deal chang-ing almost constantly since it was first announced. The taxpayers deserve better diligence from their Government. Unlike the OBA, the PLP Members over here have respect for the electora te’s ability to come to make intelligent decisions on how they want their country to go. From the very beginning this Gov-ernment has seen fit to try and cajole, convince, bam-boozle the public into seeing one thing while they are trying to do something else . What have we seen? We have seen polls with weighted questions, refusal to review details of the deal, refusal of Members inside this House to speak forthrightly, and some would say (if I coin a phrase of my father) be economical with the truth. Let us not forget the steady parade of surrogates marched in front of cameras and television and op-eds, to just try and poison the mind of the electorate. You see this deal we are looking at right here, Mr. Speaker? Most of it rests on the premise of the Minister of Finance saying, Stop asking questions. Trust me because I know finance. And we are su pposed to take those words and say, You know something? The Minister says he knows finance, so let’s go ahead and trust him. Let’s not worry about anything the One Bermuda Alliance has done since they have become Government. But let me tell you something, Mr. Speaker, how do they expect the electorate to trust them when we are talking about a broken promise of 200[sic] jobs, the broken promise to suspend term limits, the Lamb Foggo protest. Can anyone remember Jetgate? Removal of the promise to hold a referendum on gambling when presented with a petition of 5,000 ver ified voters. The furlough day debacle, anybody r ememb er that? Accusing the unions of being uncoo perative in negotiations, and then later we find out it is the unions that came up with most of the good ideas. Their opposition and refusal to stand up to this Governor who refused an order that was passed in this House. Also, the refusal to close the PRC loophole; the Pathway to Status debacle; their refusal to support MP Walton Brown’s motion to have a joint select committee to examine comprehensive immigration reform; legislation to allow PRCs and non- Bermudians greater access to the housing market while Bermudi-ans were losing their homes; the mammogram pr otests; high school students assembling on Cabinet grounds to protest the loss of scholarships; attempts to allow the children of work permit holders to wor k during the summer; disenfranchising our local mus icians; the snail’s pace— or should I say the almost complete stop —at addressing the SCORE [School Reorganisation Advisory Committee] report; the T. N. Tatem mould issues, the Premier himself calling teachers mischievous because they say they do not want to work in a mould infested school; [and] the police marching on Cabinet. Anybody remember the aborted attempt at the Privatisation Bill? Marches on Cabinet; marches on the House of Assembly, and last but not least, the pepper spraying of the electorate that you were chosen to lead. How are we supposed to trust them when he stands up and says, Trust me? How are we supposed to do that? Mr. Speaker, clearly, there is a disconnect between this Government and their self -proclaimed claims of being the best to lead Bermuda. This Go vernment has lost the confidence of the people and now see themselves in a position that they just have to force things through and who cares what the public thinks. We can go back and forth in this Chamber, as we do, for hours. We have both sides speaking very passionately about the things that they want to speak about. But see, Mr. Speaker, that is the weakness of our system. Regardless of who makes good and con-fident and intelligent debate and arguments for things, both sides will still vote whatever way they want. So, really, when I look across at the Gover nment, is it about party or is it about glory, or is it about the country? Because you hear that. They will accuse the PLP of that all the time, all day long. But I ask them, Is it about country or is it about party? So, Mr. Speaker, I believe we have reached a point where having honest conversation and honest listening is a thing of the past. We heard the Premier say all the time, My office is open to anyone. My office is open to anyone. He says it every day. Just because your office is open doesn’t mean you are listening. Just because your office is open and you are willing to meet with anyone who will take a picture with you so you can post it on social media does not mean you are listening. And now we have a Finance Minister who has declared, because I said, You don’t need that information to make an intelligent decision. He said, Stop asking me for it. That is basically what he said. So he feels it necessary to dismiss the request from the very people he has been elected to lead. Is that the type of Government we want, Mr. Speaker? Because, in my eyes, that is not what de-mocracy looks like. It is not what it looks like by a long shot. What we have seen is the height of arrogance from this One Bermuda Alliance Government. An arrogance that they either refuse to see or they actually do not care if anybody else sees it. It is one or the other. But, Mr. Speaker, with all of the things that have
Bermuda House of Assembly gone on in this Island, I am beginning to think that they just do not care if you think they are arrogant, because they are going to do it anyway. Now when I talk to my constituents, they ask me a few simple questions. I had a soup and roll event and had about 50 seniors show up, and all of them wanted to ask me about this airport deal. So, in talking to a bunch of them, I compiled a few questions, Mr. Speaker. And since the Minister has declared that all the information we need to make intelligent dec isions on this project is there in front of us (the last speaker being the latest one to run that line), I have a few questions for them and I would like an answer for that so I can take it back to my constituents because they are asking simple ques tions. Question 1: Has the Minister seen the financial models in the outputs himself? Has anyone else on his team seen the financial models and the out-puts? Question 2: Based on this deal, what does the airport need to earn in years 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 s o Government gets a share in the 50/50 per cent profits they talk about? For the same years, what would be the departure tax on my constituents? That is what they want to know. These are simple questions and if all of the i nformation is there as we are told, it should be easy for anyone of you to stand up and tell us tonight.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, you are speaking to the Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Speak to the Speaker.
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainThe last question that was asked was: How much money in total will Aecon profit over the entire life of this deal? If the Minister is seeing this information, let us know, so that we do not have to listen to, Oh, you guys are just spouting numbers out of …
The last question that was asked was: How much money in total will Aecon profit over the entire life of this deal? If the Minister is seeing this information, let us know, so that we do not have to listen to, Oh, you guys are just spouting numbers out of the sky. You are just saying things that you think are there. Well, tell us. Tell the public. These are questions that the public would like to know, Mr. Speaker. I am open. I am open to any other Member, besides the Minister, to stand up and give these answers because I am sure they have them because they have seen ever ything. You see, Mr. Speaker, we all know there might be . . . there is an impression people have of the current Finance Minister. And part of that impression is this inability to talk t o common folk in a humble and respectful manner. When I sit down and talk to seniors all they want to know is, That’s the guy who told me that money doesn’t grow on trees. That is what they remember.
[Inaudible interjection] Mr. Diallo V. S. Rabain: That is what they remember. Earlier today the Minister said, We go by the rules of the market, not by the rules of this House. That is the type of language we get from our Finance Minister. And when people hear that they walk away thinking, Does he really care about me? How can they stand and say they are working for me when ever ything he says makes it seem like he doesn’t care about me? So, Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that by any means necessary the OBA wants to push this pr oposal through. And that is w hat we are seeing tonight. If that was the case, Mr. Speaker, that there was a healthy respect for the electorate, the One Bermuda Alliance would not sneak up into the House of A ssembly under the cloak of darkness just so they can avoid any type of crowd that may collect outside to tell them, We don’t like what you are doing. A responsible Government does not do that. They do not sneak around the people. They talk to the people. They get the people’s opinions. They grow thick skin because they are going to hear words that they might not like. That is what you do, Mr. Speaker. That is what democracy is. Not everyone is going to agree with you, so you do not hide from the people who do not agree with you. You face them and talk to them. That is what you do. Mr. Speaker, the airport redevelopment, I think the last speaker mentioned this as well, it is probably the only infrastructure project of this size left on this Island. So instead of taking a path where ev erybody can get on board, the One Bermuda Alliance has chosen a path that is fraught with acrimony, s ecrecy, and suspicion. Why would they do that? They are content to blame everybody else except themselves. Instead of looking into the mirror and saying, I could have done this so much better. I could have done this in such a way that people would be on board and really be supporting me. You see, Mr. Speaker, we have heard speakers get up. All they want to do is talk about, Well, look at what you did down at the hospital. But guess what, Mr. Speaker? If they had half as much heart as the Opposition that stands here today, they would have made a difference when this project went by. But what this shows is how weak they were as an Opposition, and how [much] weaker they are as a Government. As was articulate d by the Leader, we cannot afford to give away so much money to build this ai rport, Mr. Speaker. But, then again, as has been talked about, what about the Causeway? And we will talk about the Causeway. My friend, MP De Silva, brought up something from the Throne Speech. I am going to bring up something from the Budget Speech. In the Budget Speech , Mr. Speaker, if you will allow me to quote, the Finance Minister said, when speaking about PPPs and how this would be an option to replace the airport and the Causeway, he said, “Such a development would include a new causeway 562 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly that is hurricane resistant . . . We cannot allow anot her Fabi an-like storm to cut us off from the rest of the world. ”
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainAll of a sudden the Caus eway does not matter anymore. And why doesn’t it matter? They will not tell us. All we can do is just think and wonder, What is going on? Is it because it wasn’t financially viable? Is it because Aecon wouldn’t make as much money …
All of a sudden the Caus eway does not matter anymore. And why doesn’t it matter? They will not tell us. All we can do is just think and wonder, What is going on? Is it because it wasn’t financially viable? Is it because Aecon wouldn’t make as much money if they did the Causeway? Only the Minister can answer these questions. And I wish he would answer these questions. B ecause, Mr. Speaker, I lived in St. David’s when [Hurr icane] Fabian hit last time. I was trapped over on that side, so I know what it is like. So, Mr. Speaker, what happened to the Causeway? Can anyone tell me that? Now, Mr. Speaker, as one of the few Members, I believe the only Member here, that has a child in the public school system, as a PTA president at a primary school, I see first -hand the challenges that our schools have due to ageing infrastructure, lack of r esources. I have a daughter who goes to a school and last year could not br ing homework home for four weeks because the photocopier was broken—
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainBecause the photocopier was broken. But yet, here we are, we are learning we paid Bennett Jones $4.1 million. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainFriends and family. Yes pu blic, friends and family —$4.1 million. We have schools with mould issues. At the Bermuda College, the tec hnology department’s budget has been cut to $18,000. They have students who cannot afford to buy kits, and the school cannot afford to help them. But we …
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainI mentioned earlier. We have Workforce Development and certification. Permits galore coming through. All of a sudden we point out that these permits issued under the current chairman, who sits in this Chamber, have been issued contrary to legislation. All of a sudden we found money to hire people to …
I mentioned earlier. We have Workforce Development and certification. Permits galore coming through. All of a sudden we point out that these permits issued under the current chairman, who sits in this Chamber, have been issued contrary to legislation. All of a sudden we found money to hire people to now sort that out. You could not hire them last year, or the year before, or the year before, but we found them now in the middle of a budget year. What about the Employability Skills certif icate? Students took the exams and they have been waiting patiently because this Government refused to pay City & Guilds to get those certificates. These are the things we could be spending our money on, but instead we want to give it away. So, Mr. Speaker, it is clear that this is not how deals like this should be brokered. Thirty -year deals should share bi -partisan support when brought to this House. Instead of bi -partisan support, we have heard deny, deny, deny . . . refuse, refuse, refuse unt il forced. Again, Mr. Speaker, it is just a pattern. It is a pattern of this Government. We had Members stand up here and deny Jetgate until someone dropped a dime, and all of sudden, Oh, my God. Yes, it did happen. Sorry. As my friend, MP De Silva said, we had the Minister stand up and say, We gave a letter of comfort to Morgan’s Point for this. All of a sudden somebody slips, and it turns into something else. It is a pattern. I hope the public is paying attention to this pattern. This Government will tell you one thing and do something entirely different. That is exactly what they are doing. Earlier today we heard about the PRC legislation, the Incentives for Job Makers Act. It is supposed to be there for one thing; it is now being used for something else. And what is their respons e? Well, that’s what the legislation says —because they changed it to that. You know, they take pride in the PATI legislation in bringing it to fruition. They will not tell anybody [during] their first two years they cut the budget to bare bones so the office could not set up. They will not tell anybody they brought legislation up here to change it to make it harder to gain certain documents, but they will take credit for putting it in. It is a symptom of this Government, Mr. Speaker. As the old- timers woul d say, They would give you a six for a nine, and be happy to do it. So as they stand in front of you claiming all sorts of wonderful things, always remember public, their fingers are crossed behind their backs. They do not trust you, they do not respect you, and they have nothing for you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise MP Susan Jac kson.
Ms. Susan E. JacksonMr. Speaker, I have been listening to the debate this afternoon and this, in my opinion, is probably the most desperate debate that I have heard from the Opposition since I have been sitting in the House of Assembly. Bermuda House of Assembly This is their last -ditch effort, Mr. …
Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the debate this afternoon and this, in my opinion, is probably the most desperate debate that I have heard from the Opposition since I have been sitting in the House of Assembly.
Bermuda House of Assembly This is their last -ditch effort, Mr. Speaker, to have an opportunity to have any kind of fight for the airport. They have had this as their platform. This has been, Mr. Speaker, their opportunity to try and get political leverage over the One Bermuda Alliance Government, and they have been dependent on this project from its very beginning in an effort to try and gain political points to get them to the next election and to have some kind of leverage. And it has not worked! It has not worked b ecause the Minister of Finance and his team have done a stellar job. They have paid attention to detail. They have negotiated well and they gotten to “yes.” And now there is not anything left for the Opposition to do but to grasp at straws as best they can in an effort to try and get some sort of political leverage in one last final lap before the next election. So, with that said, I would like to now preface, Mr. Speaker, by saying I am not an accountant. I do not do numbers. But one thing I have done is been exposed to a lot of information over the last year or so concerning this airport. More information than I or most other lay or Government officials necessarily have to be exposed to. And it has happened because this persistent, demanding, political leveraging that the Opposition has done for the last year has all been in an effort to try and outwit or outsmart not only the pu blic, but now, from the sounds of the debate today, they are now starting to outwit themselves. The amount of numbers, the figures that have been bounced around not only in this room, but out in the public domain, has not only been unfair to the Members in this House, it has been unfair to the pe ople who are out there in this community trying to u nderstand what is going on. And the fact is that there is something that is good that is out there that is about to happen, and the Opposition is muddling it up. And they are muddling it up for political gain. Which to me is just unbelievable . . . unbelievable, Mr. Speaker. So, now, I would like to just backtrack and kind of have a little conversation about what my experience has been like with the airport and the Oppos ition’s persistence, political persistence. I have been exposed to a number of people who have come to the table in other places outside of the House of Asse mbly to give their commentary on what they believe is the best way forward for Bermuda concerning this ai rport.
Ms. Susan E. JacksonAnd I have seen more ringing around the rosies with numbers, all kinds of fairy tale stories, unbelievable models of nothingness around figures that are creating some sort of scenario that the Opposition can use for some sort of political leverage. And it has been absolutely . . . it …
And I have seen more ringing around the rosies with numbers, all kinds of fairy tale stories, unbelievable models of nothingness around figures that are creating some sort of scenario that the Opposition can use for some sort of political leverage. And it has been absolutely . . . it has been almost embarrassing to have to listen to this and wit hout any real substance or facts being shared. So, one of my first thoughts was about these one or two folk who are running around with these, Oh, the sky is falling. I’m Chicken Little and the sky is falling. Where are all the other people that would come and say, I agree? You know, at first I thought, Well, maybe I shouldn’t say that because at any time now somebody might come up and say, I agree with you. We have not gotten one person to agree with these two or three commentators that we have had running around with, The sky is falling. On the other side of it, we have had some of Bermuda’s best. The most brilliant professionals in their field who have come out on their own reputation and said, This is a good deal. So, who is the Opposition, who have not been able to get one thing right, on time, or on budget —
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. E. David Burt: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Honourable Member is misleading the House. I am thankful that the Minister of Finance quoted the Panel correctly, and the Panel said that the deal is commercially sound.
Ms. Susan E. JacksonA good deal is a good deal. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, we have had a lot of professionals who have come out, stood by the methodology, they have stood by all of the presentations, the stacks and stacks of information that have been shared with them, with the public, …
A good deal is a good deal. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, we have had a lot of professionals who have come out, stood by the methodology, they have stood by all of the presentations, the stacks and stacks of information that have been shared with them, with the public, with the Members of the Oppo-sition, so I personally do not need any other rei nforcement that where we are going with this airport is solid and i t’s something that I personally completely trust in. Again, I am not going to get into the numbers. But there certainly has been enough professionals out there that have been able to endorse it, and I stand by and trust those individuals as well as the Minister of Finance and his team. I just want to make one other comment about the building of the airport and then I would like to speak to something else, Mr. Speaker. A few people had a presentation and the public were able to listen in through Bernews (or maybe not, actually). It was the general manager of the airport as well as the head of operations. There were a couple of things that they said about the existing airport and why we need to have this new airport. And it resonated with me as just a lay p erson. I go through the airport as a passenger. I really do not know that much about the in’s and out’s of the finance or really, to be honest with you, the ar-chitecture. But there were a couple of things that these professionals said to me. One of them was that the 564 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly materials that were used to build these airports, whether 28 or 30 years or 50 years ago, were mater ials that have now deteriorated and they are materials that in this day and age are inferior. When we build a new terminal, this terminal will be built with materials that will be sustainable because there is much better technology and there is more thought and engineering that is going into the structure. On top of that it has been made very clear to us from representatives of the team, who have s hared the information with the Opposition as well, who have said, We are going to maintain it. And do you know what? As Members of Parliament, as the public, we have a right to make sure that the maintenance of this terminal is kept abreast and up to a standard of which we can all be proud. We know that there are plenty of models out there. We have seen buildings already erected in Hamilton that have at least been built to standards of efficiency and energy sustainability that are absolutely top of the line. So, we know in Bermuda that we can create that kind of structure and we can have that kind of sophisticated technology in our buildings. And, by gol-ly, we are going to get it for the airport terminal. There is no difference. If anything, we will be an even better model of efficiency and effective technology and eng ineering. So, I have full confidence that our terminal is going to be the most appropriate for our Island, and I believe that the Minister has done an awful lot of n egotiation to get it there and that we will have som ething that we can all be proud of. Now, speaking of something we can be proud of, I have been quite embarrassed as an individual and as a Member of Parliament that the airport, the air terminal, has not been able to cater to a number of our constituents who have to travel, sometimes more often than we do, and in more dramatic levels of duress, than most of us have to. And those are our sen-iors and those who are living with disabilities. Right now the idea that we have people who have levels of integrity and pride and should have the best that our Government has to offer, riding around in baggage carts, going out into the exposure of the weather, oftentimes not well but fragile or elderly, and are being lifted up in some baggage lift to get onto the airplane, which, to me, to be honest with you, if there is going to be any investment into our infrastructure in Bermuda, it needs to be in something that is going to provide our most vulnerable members of this popul ation with some form of comfort and dignity when they are out in public and have to do something that in many cases is a distressful situation for them to be in. No one wants to go through the airport having to be in a wheelchair because they have to go overseas for medical care and have to be pulled out in some baggage claim truck in the back of something with the wind and the rain and the rest of it, in the cold, and have to get air lifted up into some baggage lift in order to get on to the plane. And this Opposition over here is saying, Oh, well, that’s okay. We don’t need this. That is a luxury. Well, yes, that is a luxury for them. They are able-bodied. What about the people we are representing? What about the vulnerable? That is who we are here for. And you know what, Mr. Speaker?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Honourable Member. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. Walton BrownThe Honourable Member is deliberately and woefully misleading the House. No one on this side is saying that we do not want adequate facilities for all who travel. Please stop the silly talk.
Ms. Susan E. JacksonSo, Mr. Speaker, in wrapping up, I would just like to say that the Opposition has tried really hard. They really gave it a good effort. They were persistent, if nothing else. But today is the end of that debate. It has been a really good shot, but we have …
So, Mr. Speaker, in wrapping up, I would just like to say that the Opposition has tried really hard. They really gave it a good effort. They were persistent, if nothing else. But today is the end of that debate. It has been a really good shot, but we have got it figured out. We are taking everybody into consideration. We are doing the best thing for Bermuda and we are going to stick to the wicket and we are going to get the job done. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 16, MP Michael Weeks.
Mr. Michael A. WeeksThank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to start off by saying that the Ho nourable Member who just took her seat talked about Chicken Little and the sky is falling. That is the exact way I would have described this current Government over these last couple of years trying …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to start off by saying that the Ho nourable Member who just took her seat talked about Chicken Little and the sky is falling. That is the exact way I would have described this current Government over these last couple of years trying to bamboozle and scare the people into thinking the airport is about to crumble to the ground. That is the impression that the people have been given by this current Gover nment. So, the questions are, Mr. Speaker: Do we need a new airport, or can we r enovate it? And if we do need a new airport, do we need it now when there are so many things that are so much more pressing in Bermuda. It is our duty, Mr. Speaker, as legislators, that when we get up in this House we speak for those that cannot speak for themselves or for those that have elected us to speak for them. I am reminded, Mr. Speaker, of that infamous, that fateful day of Decem-ber 2 nd, which started off for me as being the anniversary of a date that was 39 years prior, in 1977, of a hanging of two young Bermudian men. Little would I
Bermuda House of Assembly have thought, Mr. Speaker, when I started, when I came here on the 2nd and I was thinking about the anniversary that this day would end with pepper spray. So, speaking for those that cannot speak for themselves, that is why I am here now, Mr. Speaker. So, we ask the question, Do we need a new airport or can we renovate it? A 2008 report that was commissioned under the former Government came with a figure of $153 million, which adjusted for 2016 is $184 million. I heard the Honourable Member from constituency [28], MP Sousa, say that he sits on a panel in another place. I too sit on that same panel. I too heard the general manager of the airport talk about the state of the airport and what needs to be done to upgrade it. What I did hear, Mr. Speaker, that general manager, his frustration was more from lack of staff than anything else.
Mr. Michael A. WeeksHe should have a compl ement of 44 staff. I think it is down to 31 or 32 staff. And that is where the source of his frustration comes from. And at no time—and if I missed it, please, somebody get up and give me a point of order —but …
He should have a compl ement of 44 staff. I think it is down to 31 or 32 staff. And that is where the source of his frustration comes from. And at no time—and if I missed it, please, somebody get up and give me a point of order —but at no time did he say, Mr. Speaker, that $184 million was just a band aid [job]. There was another option, a d etailed analysis.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, if you want to stand up, you just say, Point of clarification or point of order. And then you will get my attention. [Crosstalk]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, you must . . . I just said what to do. Carry on, MP Weeks.
Mr. Michael A. WeeksThank you, Mr. Speaker. The general manager . . . at no time, I will r epeat, did he sa y that $184 million w ould be for a band aid job, for patchwork. So, if that is why the point of clarification was needed, Mr. Speaker, I hope the …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The general manager . . . at no time, I will r epeat, did he sa y that $184 million w ould be for a band aid job, for patchwork. So, if that is why the point of clarification was needed, Mr. Speaker, I hope the Honourable Member now has been duly clarified. Mr. Speaker, another issue about renovation of the airport, in my humble opinion, t his is again through the honourable airport manager, where he said a large part of the damage and destruction [to] the airport comes from storm surges . I have always been an advocate, Mr. Speaker, that if you are going to address the airport, you should talk about the bridge in the same conversation. No bridge, no airport. But if we address the bridge as we should address it, the Causeway, it would alleviate a lot of pressure and a lot of potential for destruction in the airport during storm surges. And in my humble estimation, $184 million that would bring the airport up to where it should be and (addressing the airport) would still come in lower than this $300 million that this Government is advocating that is needed for the airport alone. And I will contend, Mr. Speaker, that the money would not have to be turned into American currency. Because I too had to read the report that was gi ven to my colleagues and me. Again, it was not numbered, but it felt like a thousand pages to me. But somewhere in there, Mr. Speaker, it said that a part of the agreement was that the workers were going to be paid in US currency.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWell, of course.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWhat?
Mr. Michael A. WeeksYes. Yes, my colleague. I have had to put in a lot of reading over the last couple of weeks. So, Mr. Speaker — [Crosstalk]
Mr. Michael A. WeeksAs I continue, I find another claim while I have been sitting here saying that the new airport would somehow be a benefit to tourism. I, for one, think this is ludicrous, Mr. Speaker. No one . . . and I should not say No one, let me speak for …
As I continue, I find another claim while I have been sitting here saying that the new airport would somehow be a benefit to tourism. I, for one, think this is ludicrous, Mr. Speaker. No one . . . and I should not say No one, let me speak for m yself. When I travel somewhere to go on vacation, the airport is the last thing that I consider when I am planning my trip.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberCome on. [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Michael A. WeeksBecause when I sit — [Inaudible interjections] 566 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Michael A. Weeks: Because when I sit with my —
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberNot even where you are going to park?
Mr. Michael A. WeeksWell, somebody will take me to the airport. I do not have a problem. But when I sit with my wife and we talk about a vacation, Mr. Speaker, we talk about what we want to do on the vacation. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Michael A. WeeksThat comes a little later. We talk about what we want to do, that d etermines where we are going to go. After we make that determination, we discuss the hotel.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWell, the airport has to come up sooner or later. [Laughter]
Mr. Michael A. WeeksAnd once we do those things, I do not think that a conversation has ever come up about the state of the airport. [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Michael A. W eeksBecause like most people, Mr. Speaker, the least amount of time that you spend at the airport the better. So to try to bamboozle my people to think that if we put up a structure down there without the infrastructure within the country, it is going to improve tourism, well, …
Because like most people, Mr. Speaker, the least amount of time that you spend at the airport the better. So to try to bamboozle my people to think that if we put up a structure down there without the infrastructure within the country, it is going to improve tourism, well, come on. Come on. One of my colleagues spoke and turned around about an hour ago talking about pin the tail on the donkey.
Mr. Michael A. WeeksYes, yes, yes. Okay. Let’s move on. As I move on, Mr. Speaker, I also heard the Honourable Member from constituency 4, talk about the state of the airport, the airport workers should not have to work in crumbling and dilapidated conditions. And she was absolutely right. I agree with …
Yes, yes, yes. Okay. Let’s move on. As I move on, Mr. Speaker, I also heard the Honourable Member from constituency 4, talk about the state of the airport, the airport workers should not have to work in crumbling and dilapidated conditions. And she was absolutely right. I agree with that. But FYI [for your information] for those who do not know, Mr. Speaker, teachers and students should not have to work in a crumbling— [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Michael A. Weeks—infrastructure and poor building either. [Gavel] [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Michael A. WeeksMost of these schools that our children attend, and I cannot speak to the private schools because my children are over in public. So I am only speaking about the schools that I know. But most of those schools are 50 years plus. Most of them are twice the age …
Most of these schools that our children attend, and I cannot speak to the private schools because my children are over in public. So I am only speaking about the schools that I know. But most of those schools are 50 years plus. Most of them are twice the age of the airport. So if we want to talk about priorities , let us take what happened out there at Spice Valley a little more seriously than some of us are taking it. We have moved our children from there—
[Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Michael A. WeeksWarwick Secondary, Spice Valley, T. N. Tatem. T. N. Tatem, Mr. Speaker —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerT. N. Tatem, that is correct.
Mr. Michael A. W eeksI have been reminded that it now has been changed to T. N. Tatem.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerDo you want me name the Minister that named it T. N. Tatem? [Laughter]
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberHow about the number -one princ ipal that was there?
Mr. Michael A. WeeksThe number -one principal. But, Mr. Speaker, what I am trying to say is, we have moved our students from T. N. Tatem down to Clearwater. By all intents and purposes, they have been complaining about that mould and mildew for Bermuda House of Assembly years now. Heaven knows how …
The number -one principal. But, Mr. Speaker, what I am trying to say is, we have moved our students from T. N. Tatem down to Clearwater. By all intents and purposes, they have been complaining about that mould and mildew for
Bermuda House of Assembly years now. Heaven knows how many of our children and/or teachers have been made sick. I have been made to understand that the scheduled date of Feb-ruary 20 th is when our children are supposed to move back up there because the school is not going to be ready, Mr. Speaker. I cannot see it being ready any time before the end of this school year. But my point is, Mr. Speaker, that priority should be given to our infrastructure because the airport can and will survive. Mr. Speaker, if we are going to address the airport, I would suggest that we renovate it for that $184 million band aid. And we could use it, and again, I am not an economist, Mr. Speaker, and I may be short on my figures when I try to break down the numbers. But that $184 million, based on the revenue that the airport is receiving, we could address the air-port needs over a 5- , 6-, 7-year period—
Mr. Michael A. Weeks—spending $15 –20 million per year. Now, again, in my travels, Mr. Speaker, very few airports that I have gone into . . . and they have been set right up, there is always some kind of work being done. So when they again try to bamboozle the people that …
—spending $15 –20 million per year. Now, again, in my travels, Mr. Speaker, very few airports that I have gone into . . . and they have been set right up, there is always some kind of work being done. So when they again try to bamboozle the people that say, Oh, you don’t want to go down to that airport if there is work being done . . . I remember clearly, I was traveling to New York. I think it was a couple of years in a row, about three or four times a year. And I remember they were building the new American Airlines terminal. And there was dust and stuff all over the place. But I would venture to say, Mr. Speaker, that if we study the numbers, the number of travellers did not decrease going to JFK because of the dust. It just made people want to get out of the airport quicker when they got there. So why don’t we be innovative, if we are trying to create real jobs for Bermudians? We could try to renovate or temporarily fit the kitchen that is over the (I am not good with directions) the nort heast side—
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberNorth.
Mr. Michael A. Weeks—north side of the ter minal. We could temporarily fit that as an arrival . . . [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Michael A. WeeksWell, it is on the airport pre mises across the way over there by the kitchen, we could temporarily fit that place again, for our depar-tures and arrivals. And if need be we could be more creative, there is a hangar that is farther down the strip. We have to …
Well, it is on the airport pre mises across the way over there by the kitchen, we could temporarily fit that place again, for our depar-tures and arrivals. And if need be we could be more creative, there is a hangar that is farther down the strip. We have to be cr eative, Mr. Speaker, that would put our own Bermudians back to work. Because the report that I started off talking about, Mr. Speaker, it breaks down all the things that needed to be done. And when I looked at it, I thought about all my tradesmen. All those Bermudian tradesmen that are out of work that would find work over a 5 or 6 year period, keeping our airport at the level that it is supposed to be. Let me tell you a joke, Mr. Speaker. I, like a lot of people, saw the video (I do not know who sent it around) about all the water that was coming in the airport all down through the lights. I mentioned it to the general manager and his colleague, the engineer. I said, What happens with all that water coming down through the lights and whatnot? He laughed and said, You know what it is, Minister? It’s only that the gutters are not big enough to collect the water going into the tank for going off the building. So that was merely the water that was settling on the roof and coming down. Right? But pictures speak a thousand words, so peo-ple posted that stuff thinking that the airport was fal ling. One of my colleagues on the other side mentioned about Chicken Little. That, to me, was a true example of being Chicken Little. The airport was not in that state and the picture was intended to paint the picture that it is not the case. Also, Mr. Speaker, how many $4 million renovation costs would include a new cargo, but the $302 million airport does not.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Michael A. WeeksWow! So the question r emains, this $300 million is a constantly rolling figure. I have even heard that the cost to build Mississauga Airport could cost about $400 milli on. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Michael A. WeeksAnd it started from, I think one of my colleagues said $200 [million]. [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Michael A. WeeksYes, m an, but nobody was going to do it. [Inaudible interjections] 568 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Michael A. Weeks: No, no, no, no, no. [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Michael A. WeeksReports were done and that was it. Yes. So reports were done and that was it. So, Mr. Speaker, we heard it all before, back and forth, over the last two- plus years, if whether or not we could build an airport or renovate. My feeling, my position, is renovating …
Reports were done and that was it. Yes. So reports were done and that was it. So, Mr. Speaker, we heard it all before, back and forth, over the last two- plus years, if whether or not we could build an airport or renovate. My feeling, my position, is renovating would not only keep the money in our country, it would put more Bermudians to work, and work on our terms. They know what the local airport needs. Another colleague of mine said, We don’t want our airport to look like Mississauga, o r some other far -off land. At this point in time, $300 mi llion—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThere’s an airport in Mississauga?
Mr. Michael A. WeeksSo, Mr. Speaker, with those few words, I have made my contribution. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Minister of Works. And I must let Members know that Members are now afforded 20 minutes to speak. We have had seven hours of debate, and once seven hours have been completed the amount of time Members are …
All right. Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Minister of Works. And I must let Members know that Members are now afforded 20 minutes to speak. We have had seven hours of debate, and once seven hours have been completed the amount of time Members are a llowed to speak diminishes to 20 minutes. So, 20 minutes.
[Crosstalk ]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on, Honourable Member. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let me start out by saying that this certainly has been quite a journey. Albeit, it probably has not been long, but it certainly feels long. I have had the privilege of sitting in on the Project …
Carry on, Honourable Member. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let me start out by saying that this certainly has been quite a journey. Albeit, it probably has not been long, but it certainly feels long. I have had the privilege of sitting in on the Project Co board meetings and from week to week, from every Monday, painstakingly going hours and hours on Monday afternoons on a religious basis, looking at the pros and cons of the airport deal as we speak to it today. And so I am fami liar with many of the details that have taken place in getting to this point today. As I open up, I also want to thank the former Minister, the Honourable Member Minister Crockwell, for the hard work that he did put in preliminarily as he was the Minister. And the reason I say that is because he is someone that I have learned to trust in looking at the details and ensuring that we cover our bases. I would also say that about the Honourable Finance Minister a nd give those same accolades to him, because every time and every Monday afternoon when we had our meetings, those meetings were not easy for him. In fact, many of us challenged him on many different occasions on many, many different issues as we moved through this deal that we have in front of us today.
Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: I would like to reflect on the fact that I actually appreciate much of what I have heard from the Opposition and from the public as well, and their concern about this airport dea l that we are speaking to. I would even dare say that had we not had some of the opposition that we have had, we might not have been exposed to, quite frankly, some of the documents that you have been exposed to. So, I do not have much issue there. What I recognise is that the Finance Minister has really put himself on the line with this here every step of the way. And when information was requested, obviously, he had to go back and say, Well, listen, Aecon, they are requesting information. Is it okay that we release this information? I was in on those conversations, listening to how he was wrestling with trying to figure how does he ask to get some of these things exposed and out there. The real key to this is that every step of the way as we deliberated over these things some of us encouraged him, Well, look, if they are asking for it, just go ahead and present it. Obv iously, you have got to get cooperation from the contractor. Obviously! But go ahead. And every step of the way, it may have taken a little longer for some of us than we would have liked, but the information was provided. And so what we have seen is a lot of information being given to the public. A lot of information being given to these Members in the House of A ssembly. And quite frankly, it has probably been over-load for a lot of people. It is a lot of information. Cer-tainly I know, because every single Monday afternoon
Bermuda House of Assembly was tied up in meetings going over and over and over the issues we are debating this evening. And so I appreciate what has taken place. What I do not apprec iate is a lot of the rhetoric around it. And many folks are confused. They are confused. So, again, I go back to thanking everyone for us getting to this point. It has been frustrating, to say the least, so that we in this H onourable Chambers can finally sit down and debate the issues. Now, I am not going to get side- tracked by the rhetoric of, you know, coming in the darkness, and all of that. You know, I have been sitting in this House of Assembly and I have heard this Government and this administration called “practitioners of the dark arts” and all kinds of stuff. So, you know, we have heard a whole lot of stuff in the House of Assembly going back and forth. But what really is important is what took place today. What took place today. Because at the end of the day we finally had a panel who weighed in on the issue of what we are debating today. And the summary is, it is the overall [Blue Ribbon] Panel’s view that it is a good deal. That is the summary, in one sen-tence, that sums it up. What I am getting to with this here, is that . . . in the bewilderment of all of this i nformation and everyone having something to say about the airport, I dare say that for many it became confusing. And we have heard about this trust factor. The Opposition is saying, Oh, well, you know, other people don’t trust the administration. Be careful what you say. Because what I have seen today and the result of today, is that not many of them had any trust in them, as well. But what they did have trust in, Mr. Speaker, was an independent panel of iconic people in this Island who are grassroots, grew up on this I sland, and made something of themselves. And to suggest that this independent panel cannot weigh in objectively on this issue (and some of them I know personally —who are certainly not of the persuasion of a red tie) is quite interesting to me . . . quite interesting to me. Well, you know, let’s go on from there. It was asked, Well, why don’t we get the Auditor General to weigh in on this thing? And certainly they came back and said, Well, it is not within their remit and they don’t have the resources to do it. But how dare the Opposition go down this kind of road. We have seen what they do to Auditor Generals in the past, even the ones that they appoint themselves. Hon. E. David Burt: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Honourable Member. POINT OF ORDER Hon. E. David Burt: I am completely shocked that a former Premier would actually get on his feet and say that the Government appoints the Auditor General. Can he please retract that remark? [Inaudible interjections] Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: I got a little bit …
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThat does not happen. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: I will retract that statement.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: But we recognise what has taken place under the former administration to Auditor Generals. And what surprises me . . . I have heard in this House comments made towards a former Auditor General that were not in any w ay characteristic of what I …
Yes. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: But we recognise what has taken place under the former administration to Auditor Generals. And what surprises me . . . I have heard in this House comments made towards a former Auditor General that were not in any w ay characteristic of what I know of her. And it is almost as if we do not recognise that the public has become frustrated—and I said it last week and I will say it again— with the bickering and the fighting and the skirmishing down in the playground, while the rest of the world is stealing our lunch.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Stealing our lunch. Oh, now the Opposition has got all kinds of things to say, the Opposition Leader. He has had his turn to speak; now he wants to interpolat e. And then to sit up here, and I will go on fore ver if he wants to interpolate, and to get up here and hear from his Members sit up here and talk about friends and family? I cannot believe that you would even end this debate going to that point of friends and family. Please do not do it. It is not necessary. It is all rhetoric. I would consider proactive a family friend. But what happened under their administr ation? Lopes [Construction] got all the multim illiondollar contracts. Correia [Construction] got the mult imillion dollar contract. Landmark got the multimillion-dollar contract. Name me a business of colour that got a multimillion -dollar contract. I know one of them, and they got unceremoniously fired. Only to listen to this House, for somebody to say that Somers Construction is affiliated with Aecon, when it was Somers Construc-tion who finished off the Berkeley Institute, under the PLP Government. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: It does not matter. You can go on about the numbers all you want. The point is, Mr. Speaker, we have an independent panel of people that the public respects. And so you might not have liked the way that this panel was chosen. And I get all of that. But I do recognise that the public has seen this panel as members that they can respect for their opinion. And that is why t o570 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly day looks like it does. That is why it looks like it does today. So, we might not like it. We might not like the results of today, but i t is what it is. So, the two things that I was concerned about, because I heard, you know, this has got to be more about terms and conditions of what we are debating here. I identify two conditions that have plagued cap ital projects since we have been doing them. And it has been a political football with these capital projects every single time. And it is this: Can the capital budget come in on budget and on time? On budget and on time. And we heard back when certain project . . . now, it is already mentioned. You know, a former Honourable Member of this House, a Premier at that, to say, O n budget, on time, on budget, on time, on budget, on time. And it was a political football. It b ecame a political football because we all know that the end result was it was not on budget and on time. So that has plagued these projects. And then the second one, Mr. Speaker, of these two conditions is: Understanding that as a cou ntry we are in debt. And the fact that we have som ething that has been very creative here, this particular project is attempting to not impact on the national debt in any big way. We heard earlier about how we have had to be creative because it is very difficult to get investment in the country into many of our infrastruc-ture projects. Because the financing just cannot seem to be worked out. We just do not have the numbers. You know, I am dealing with a situation right now, Mr. Speaker, with WEDCO [West End Development Cor-poration] and Albert Row. You all know about it. It has been very difficult to find investment in Albert Row. It is a historical site building. It is listed, so, it has got to be restored back to its original so- called state as best as possible. But to get the financing for it is very, very difficult.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: And America’s Cup does not have it. In fact, so if he did his homework he would know that America’s Cup does not have Albert Row. It is still sitting there dilapidated, looking for an investor somehow. Somehow.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Yes, you have fixed it, but you did not. So, that is where we stand. And so we have to get creative. All the entrepreneurs in this room know that at a time that we are living in when it is difficult to go to the bank and get money, you have got to get creative. Small business has got to get real creative because it is hard to get to the bank and by the time you get to the bank and you go through this and you go through that to get some money to help your business get along and a great idea, a year has gone down the line, and it has taken you six months just to get a bank account open with the banks. And so , you have to get creative. And so, what we have here is quite creative and unique, very unique. I understand . . . and that is why it should come under some great criticism because it is creative and it is unique. But I can say this: A lot of that panel . . . I must respect their opinions because I know all of the fights that we have had in our own Chambers over this matter in trying to get to this point today. I say every week when I get up, if I get up every week to say something, the rhetoric . . . the people are tired of it. Tired of the rhetoric.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Yes, tired of the rhetoric. I hear people saying that. You know, I go back to then, you say, Well, people don’t want a fancy airport. You know, but in my capacity I have the plans that were drawn up by the former administration for the airport down there. I have seen them. And they are quite nice. But what I took note of were the objectives that were assigned to a potential new airport. Those objectives were not done by the architects. Those objectives would have been done by the administration. Well, you know what one of those objectives were? It had to be iconic. But yet we get up here and we say, Well, I don’t know . I go to the airport; I don’t have to go to a fancy airport, and blah, blah, blah. Well, one of their objectives was that the airport had to be iconic. So, those plans that were drawn up, quite frankly, were beautiful. I much prefer what I saw in that book. They were sharp statements. In addition to it, marinas and all kinds of things. It was brilliant, actually. But the fact is, we cannot afford it. We cannot afford it. So, we have in front of us quite an interesting deal that we put together here. It is creative and many of us have weighed in on the pros and cons of the finances of this here. But at the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, I do not think that this is a case that we are forcing anything at all. I mean, look how long it has taken for us to get where we are. And the amount of information that has been given to ensure that it is available to everyone. So I believe that it is very unfair to say that this thing is being forced on anyone. The debate has been put off . . . the debate has been put off time and time again. And I already said. I appreciate the fact that the Opposition has brought things to the table. But how dare anyone in this House say this is being forced on anyone. It is not being forced anyone. This is something that the OBA Government believes is a good deal going forward. There will always be opposition or something to say about a deal. Certainly, we can go back into history of our time and look at many of the deals that were done and say, Well, you shouldn’t have done
Bermuda House of Assembly this and you shouldn’t have that. Oh well, you should have done this and you should have done that. So I get that. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Yes. And I expect to hear it. I expect to hear it. It is like a broken record. It just keeps going on and on and on. And at the end of the day, the people of Bermuda get frustrated because it just goes on and on and on, Mr. Speaker. I am sure that others of us might get frustrated, Opposition gets frustrated, Government gets frustrated. But I would never question the integrity of this process. This particular project has been scrutinised like no other. And you want to know what, Mr. Speak-er? Quite frankly, it is a good thing. Because when 2012 of December rolled around and the OBA be-came Government, there were two things that we recognised: That there was a need to create opportunities for job creation; and it was also understood that fiscally, financially, we had to get some things straight. And it has not been easy. We hear talk about mould and the likes. But if everyone in this House, because the Opposition were Government, they would know that the issues that we have been battling within these last four years are not issues that just crept up. It is difficult as a Government to get to all of these things. So, I recognise how diff icult it is in this Ministry to deal with many of these i ssues. No one wants our kids to be going to school where there is mould. But the Opposition needs to be very clear, that mould was there when they were Government as well. In fact, today we are still dealing with an issue that arose during their administration where we are paying millions of dollars for a lawsuit because of mould. Millions of dollars! In fact, we had a supplementary in the last Budget to start paying on this particular issue. And I am not blaming the Opposition for it. But we got issues that we got to deal with. And they do not get dealt with overnight. Infrastructure is falling apart despite the fact that the Opposition went into debt to do a lot of infrastructure build. We still got a whole lot more to do. A whole lot more to do. Yes, we can even go back to some of those projects I heard interpolated, back to the UBP. So I appreciate the Opposition and many of the things that they have to say because it holds us to account. But how dare any of them come into this House and start saying we are not thinking about the students and the kids. Because I would say the same thing back to them. What were you doing? That mould is 10 years old. You couldn’t even come into this House because the count was so high. Those two spots, Mr. Speaker, behind you, the amount of mould that was there was incredible. I do not know how you guys who have been here longer than me were able to put up with it. But when they got taken down, my goodness!
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWe wore mould repellent. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: You wore mould repellent. [Laughter] Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: But, Mr. Speaker, in my appreciation for where the Opposition is, I can say with full heartedness, that everyone that has been involved as I gave accolades to the former Minister Crockwell who …
We wore mould repellent. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: You wore mould repellent.
[Laughter]
Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: But, Mr. Speaker, in my appreciation for where the Opposition is, I can say with full heartedness, that everyone that has been involved as I gave accolades to the former Minister Crockwell who was involved and those who are involved now with this project, it has not been easy to come to the point where we are today, but we are here. And we believe that it is important to the people of Bermuda because we recognise that not only will we get a new building, but it will provide opportunities for work and jobs. [Timer beeps ]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: It is my time already!
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member, . . . yes, 20 minutes is much better than 30. [Inaudible interjection s]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerMaybe I will go to five [minutes]. [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThen everybody will say, I’m finished already? Yes. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member Commissiong from constituency 21. You have the floor.
Mr. R olfe CommissiongThank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that I decided to ask a fellow Member to allow me to get up to follow the former Premier because I have noticed over the last few years that that Member from constituency 12 consis tently mispresents the record …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that I decided to ask a fellow Member to allow me to get up to follow the former Premier because I have noticed over the last few years that that Member from constituency 12 consis tently mispresents the record of the PLP Government. Tonight he egregiously and insultingly evoked the matter with respect to ProActive Construc-tion. Mr. Speaker, let me offer some insight b ecause it bears on what we are talking here in terms of this development project. You see, that Member may not be aware of it, but the moment that ProActive got that contract, they became targets, targets on the part of very powerful developers and others within this community who support the same party that he repr e572 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly sents. One other in particular used to camp out at the Bank of Bermuda trying through his network to have the loan pulled from under the feet of ProActive. The same individual who in the latter incarnation pos itioned himself as someone who was offering volunt eer services to make sure Bermuda got the America’s Cup, who then went on to get a very lucrative contract with the America’s Cup —that same individual. People like Phil Butterfield had to step in and ensure then- CEO of the Bank of Bermuda that the machinations that they were trying to bring about were not going to take place. That is some of the bac kground there. The same people whose aunty he ran into to elevate himself at the expense of his own people were the ones who were behind that and are still per petua ting the same sort of practices today that continue to have his own people marginalised, economically and otherwise, in this country.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongI am getting to that. Now, let me tell you something. The bottom line is we had some people who were in leadership positions who thought that the way to deal with the racism coming from that party and its supporters, very powerful men and women, was to appease them. …
I am getting to that. Now, let me tell you something. The bottom line is we had some people who were in leadership positions who thought that the way to deal with the racism coming from that party and its supporters, very powerful men and women, was to appease them. And I am not condoning what happened to ProActive, but that is the way it transpired, that if we can appease the racism in our community that somehow they would show favour to us. I am pretty certain that the Member in constituency 12 played the same game. Look where he ended up, as a figurehead for them in 2012. Yes, walk out. You have been playing this game for the last three years in this House.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, let’s . . . let’s . . . you are getting off . . . you are getting off base.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo, no you are not on base. Now you can start and you are on base.
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongMr. Speaker, I would just like to wrap up on that and say that for the last three years I have heard that Member keep coming back to this, about how the PLP abandoned the black entr epreneurs before the election. Again, he is talking about the Jerry Webb’s and …
Mr. Speaker, I would just like to wrap up on that and say that for the last three years I have heard that Member keep coming back to this, about how the PLP abandoned the black entr epreneurs before the election. Again, he is talking about the Jerry Webb’s and all the rest. People who consistently played the game thinking that, you know, they could ingratiate themselves with very powerful, white economic interest in this country and put themselves in a position to derive white paternalism and white patronage. Mr. Gibbons knows what I am talking about, Mr. Speaker. They all know. That is the game. That is a part of the system of control. Have Bermuda’s A nglo-Saxon community be able to perpetuate this dominance of this country right up into the modern era, to today. But make me Premier —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, speak . . . speak not to that Member that is standing at the door. You would do much better when you speak to me.
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongMr. Speaker, with your i ndulgence, I just want to read a couple of paragraphs from a Gazette article. It was published February 2nd, 2017.
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongIt was writte n by Mr. Wendell Hollis and Mr. Andrew Outerbridge. And I quote: “We write, not on behalf of any particular party, cause , or group, but as two Bermudian professionals who have worked in our respective professions for more than 40 years, have a great love for …
It was writte n by Mr. Wendell Hollis and Mr. Andrew Outerbridge. And I quote: “We write, not on behalf of any particular party, cause , or group, but as two Bermudian professionals who have worked in our respective professions for more than 40 years, have a great love for our island, and are deeply concerned for its future. “Michael Dunkley, the Premier, has written that the present proposal for the construction of Bermuda’s new airport by Aecon, a Canadian company backed by the Canadian Government, is ‘the right deal at the right time for the right reasons.’ We took him at his word, looked at the plans and then took the virtual tour through the proposed new airport that the Government provided. During that tour, we did not feel in any way that we were in Bermuda. We felt like we were in one of the many too easily forgotten Middle American or Canadian provincial airports that function well but were built to serve only one purpose, which was to transit passengers from the ground to the air and back as efficiently as possibl e. “There was no sense or feel of Bermuda in the airport; either on the outside or the inside.” I continue on. “Bermuda is in the tourism business and the tea leaves of geopolitical events indicate that we may need to grow and recharge this business merel y to survive. The airport is the first impression that a tourist gets of Bermuda and the last impression they have upon departing. The right airport would be one de-signed to inject the spirit of Bermuda into them upon arrival and leave that spirit with them on departure.” One more paragraph, with your indulgence,
Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerYes. Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Rolfe Commissiong: “The planned airport before us does not do either. Unlike the new hospital, the Government did not come up with a concept and then go to the people for approval. In the case of the hospi-tal, the first concept was not accepted …
Yes.
Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Rolfe Commissiong: “The planned airport before us does not do either. Unlike the new hospital, the Government did not come up with a concept and then go to the people for approval. In the case of the hospi-tal, the first concept was not accepted by the people and withdrawn. When the new concept was accepted, the Government of the day decided to build it on the public -private partnership basis in the same way as this government proposes to have this airport built. Wendell Hollis” (one of the authors) “was deputy chairman of the Bermuda Hospitals Board at that time and the BHB was determined that it would not be su bject to criticism on — or an inquiry into—how the pr ocess of the building of the new hospital would be car-ried out. The BHB decided” (as alluded by my col-league only earlier, MP De Silva) “to engage KPMG, one of the world’s top four accounting firms, to advise it every step of the way. “Ironically, KPMG appointed Malcolm Butterfield, chairman of the Blue Ribbon Committee just put together to review and justify the figures for the new airport, to be its liaison officer for the hospital project. Butterfield advised that the process should start with a request for proposals.” I repeat, Malcolm Butterfield advised then that the process should start with a request for proposals. So in other words, a little different scenario than what my colleague, MP De Silva, said. It appears here by the recollection of the the n-Chairman, Mr. Hollis, that Butterfield advised that this whole process should start with a request for proposals. “So an RFP was formulated under KPMG’s guidance and issued to the world of finance and construction. More than ten international consortiums with Bermudian participation entered the bidding process. Their proposals included designing, building, financing, and maintaining the new hospital. Under the watchful eye and scrutiny of KPMG, those proposals were reduced to five, then to three, and finally down to the successful bidder. At each step of the way, the BHB made the final decision under the review of KPMG, which issued and signed an opinion that all was above board and that the process was handled with absolute fairness.” End quote. And so the same process that we on this side had been advocating from day one was the one that Mr. Butterfield himself then advised. You know, I heard somebody say that this whole process has been—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, I cannot hear you for yo ur colleagues.
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongMr. Speaker, I have heard it said that in some respect this process has been like trying to put lipstick on a pig. And, certainly, Bermudi-ans deserve much better. You see, Mr. Speaker, today we witness clandestinely surreptitiously the Government coming into this Chamber, in this building at 5:00 am …
Mr. Speaker, I have heard it said that in some respect this process has been like trying to put lipstick on a pig. And, certainly, Bermudi-ans deserve much better. You see, Mr. Speaker, today we witness clandestinely surreptitiously the Government coming into this Chamber, in this building at 5:00 am or so in the morning, under cover of darkness. Who were they running from? Who were they hiding from? Through-out this process, it has been marked by a lack of transparency and thus the levels of distrust around it have been phenomenal. But it has been an outcome of their own making. Suspicion has also been engendered because more and more Bermudians are tired of the same old scenario unfolding. Go back to the America’s Cup. What has been the biggest resistance to wholesale acceptance of it? The marginalisation of significant numbers of Bermudians from participating in it in a substantive way. Why? Because on the model of economic pr ogress that Bermuda traditionally constructed, black Bermudians always played a marginal role, so with the advent of the United Bermuda Party/OBA, again we are seeing a duplication of the same old scenario unfold ing with every major economic project. This will be no different and Bermudians are not stupid. We will see the same outcomes with this project Look at the provisions that are made in here, as alluded to by my colleagues, about the number of Bermudians which they say will be offered jobs in this project. At first, as indicated, they promised that 75 percent of those jobs would go to Bermudians with only 25 percent reserved for Canadians. We are now down to a point where 60 percent of the jobs are g oing to go to Bermudians and 40 percent to the Canadians. But rest assured . I believe that there will be another back -end pathway by which they will have more foreign workers by way of some of the Bermudi-an subcontractors. On top of that, as previously mentioned, we are going to find that common labourers are going to be required to do hundreds of hours of what they call training before they can have a meaningful participation in this project —at least before they go in. Will this mean that they will have to have this sort of equiv alency of training before they are able to get the jobs? We want to know.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongClassroom training. I u nderstand the Government’s frustration, but like I said, it is a frustration of their own making. I wrote a piece in the paper not too long ago, Mr. Speaker, where I talked about that this is like manna from heaven, in essence, with the Canadian developers. …
Classroom training. I u nderstand the Government’s frustration, but like I said, it is a frustration of their own making. I wrote a piece in the paper not too long ago, Mr. Speaker, where I talked about that this is like manna from heaven, in essence, with the Canadian developers. And part of it is that with these P3 pr ojects it is all about managing what I call the risk trans-fer. And I believe that the Canadians have essentially taken this Government to the bank. And what I mean by that is realising that part of the motivation and keen interest of the Government securing this deal has been predicated upon their political ambition to be returned to power at the next election, because they have manifestly failed to produce the broad- based 574 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly growth, jobs , and opportunity that Bermudians were expecting. If they are not able to do this with this pr oject and possibly with Club Med , they know their chances of being re- elected are slim to none. In fact, I am convinced that polls right now internally indicate to them that they are on thinning ice. Savvy global players such as Aecon, who have been around the block a number of times with projects like this, know what levers to pull. They know how desperate this Government is and they will exact every concession , as we have seen by way of this process. My good friend, again, from constituency 29, indicated graphically the bait -and-switch what started out as the project was only going to cost $200 million with the C auseway , at the beginning —
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongYes, yes, the bait . And then the switch to now we are at the point where the pr oject is going to cost over $400 million. [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongOkay, okay, no C auseway then. Okay. So $200 million without a Causeway , but now you are up to over $400 million without a Causeway. Bermudians are not stupid! There is some contention around that some Members are saying there was — [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongSo, you know, I hear interpolations over there. But I am going to ignore them. Again, Bermudians are not convinced that these types of projects, knowing what are the predic table outcomes with projects —major projects and ec onomic engines that have been fostered by that side of the aisle …
So, you know, I hear interpolations over there. But I am going to ignore them. Again, Bermudians are not convinced that these types of projects, knowing what are the predic table outcomes with projects —major projects and ec onomic engines that have been fostered by that side of the aisle . . . they know that it will be only benefitting a very small, very powerful group of their own suppor ters and major business interests in the Island. And that is why deep down they do not trust this Gover nment when it comes to these issues. They know that the outcome will hardly be different than what they are seeing, as I mentioned with the America’s Cup. What we see, Mr. Speaker, is not an example of enlightened self -interest , but rather an example of naked self -interest. People talk about the issue about privatisation. It is clear that in most textbooks, in most reputable business schools, privatisation of a public asset occurs when a public asset has been taken over by a private entity whether it is a long leasehold or not. If they use that public asset for their own private gain encumbered by a development deal, the likes of which we are seeing now, that constitutes a pr ivatis ation of the asset. Again, that is standard interpretation and standard definition in most business schools about the phenomenon of privatisation. I think we just need to thank people, and it has been mentioned already, Reverend Kingsley Tweed, presidents Jason Hayward of the Bermuda Public Services Union (BPSU) and Chris Furbert —key members of what we know as the People’s Campaign. They were at the forefront of this issue from the beginning talking about the ethical challenges at the very beginning when we were told that CCC selected Aecon when everybody knows now . . . and I noticed that the murmurs of the opposition continue to get quieter and quieter when we say this : Everybody knows that it was Aecon that selected CCC, in essence. I am going to go a little further , because ev erybody starts with Aecon selected CCC . . . I am going to contend that it was people like Michael Butt, a key OBA supporter that probably within hours of them winning the Government was on the phone to Canada with Aecon to mobilise the whole thing.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongYes, that is my view. I could be wrong, but that is just my view. I mean, for months now I have been trying to say, Well, where has Michael Butt been in this? First they were saying no, it is not that Michael Butt . People were confusing him …
Yes, that is my view. I could be wrong, but that is just my view. I mean, for months now I have been trying to say, Well, where has Michael Butt been in this? First they were saying no, it is not that Michael Butt . People were confusing him with a guy in insurance/reinsurance. People were not sure about the Somers [Construction] . . . the guy , Butt, in Somers [Construction] was connected to Aecon. Well, I think now we know who he is —the same Michael Butt. He is on the board. He is a player. Again, getting back to the People’s Campaign, we have a legal opinion from a high, leading QC in the UK who spoke to the fact that the Government . . . in their considered view, Minister Richards did mislead the people from the very beginning about the nature of how . . . on the terms of the genesis of this deal . These things did not breed confidence. And, yes, you know, the people talk about the recent poll. I suspect right now that Bermudians are so desperate right now for anything that can add some value, that can pr oduce some work and jobs , particularly a lot of our young black men and others , that they are going to, you know, throw a H ail Mary pass in terms of this deal after three long, torturous years of this. So, that poll does not surprise me. However, knowing that that poll may have some credibility does not change the underlying principles that we must stand for with respect to how this deal came to the table. So, Mr. Speaker, I will end with those comments and I thank you for your indulgence once again.
[Timer beeps]
Bermuda House of Assembly The Speaker: Thank You, Honourable Member The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 25, the Learned Member, MP Mark Pettingill. You have the floor.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillMr. Speaker, there are two debates , in my view , that are going on tonight . And they are head and heart debates. I have been, for some time, fundamentally torn over this issue of this airport development. Fundamentally . And the Honourable Member who just took his seat, …
Mr. Speaker, there are two debates , in my view , that are going on tonight . And they are head and heart debates. I have been, for some time, fundamentally torn over this issue of this airport development. Fundamentally . And the Honourable Member who just took his seat, who , certainly, I regard as a friend of mine, referred to Anglo- Saxon discrimination that perpetuates to this day. Well, I am a blue -eyed Anglo- Saxon. That is my heritage . And if we Anglo- Saxons do not pause for a second and realise that this Honourable Member is speaking his truth and is speaking his perception and is speaking his facts and his reality from his heart , then we have a serious problem . Because nobody can stand up and say that that Honourable Member when he said those things is wrong. I heard the intake of the breath across the country from the Anglo- Saxons that heard him say that. But can I stand here and say that he is wrong in his view that this Anglo -Saxon discrimination perpetuates to this day? Of course he is not wrong. And people who are Anglo- Saxon better wake up and realise, if they want to be Bermudians , that that reality persists to this day. And until they are able to take pause and recognise that that is the view of many people in this country and that is how they feel , we will continue to have polarisation, and we will continue to have the problems that we have, and we will continue to have the race divide that we have because we do not take pause as Anglo -Saxons and realise that this perception is a reality and that we, in the things that we do , only serve to perpetuate that.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberHear, hear!
Mr. Mark J. PettingillWe do that . I remember something that the Honourable Zane De Silva said some years ago that resonated with me shortly before I quit the Mid Ocean Club. He said, Do not stand up as a white Anglo- Saxon and tell people come on down, you are welcome at …
We do that . I remember something that the Honourable Zane De Silva said some years ago that resonated with me shortly before I quit the Mid Ocean Club. He said, Do not stand up as a white Anglo- Saxon and tell people come on down, you are welcome at Mid Ocean if you are black, you can come on it. We would love to have you here. Come play golf here. If you really feel that you want to bridge that great divide, go join the Pembroke Hamilton Club (PHC). Go join the Bermuda Industrial Union (BIU), if you are a labour person. Go join the Progressive Labour Party (PLP), if that is where your politics are. That is how you bridge the great divide. I did not leave the United Bermuda Party to start the Bermuda Democratic Party in my kitchen with my best mate over there and a few others and then form as an alliance the One Bermuda All iance — An Hon. Member: So many names. [Laughter and inaudible interjections ]
Mr. Mark J. PettingillNo. I have sat in so many places in this House I get confused when I walk in the door . I know who I am; I just do not always know where I am. There are many people that feel —and I am one of them —that the UBP …
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberOoh! [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Mark J. PettingillAnd people look at you and say, Well, let ’s have a look . And , you know, facts are reality. The facts are reality . And coming back to the Anglo -Saxon thing, we are just like a bunch of white Anglo -Saxon ostriches with our heads in the …
And people look at you and say, Well, let ’s have a look . And , you know, facts are reality. The facts are reality . And coming back to the Anglo -Saxon thing, we are just like a bunch of white Anglo -Saxon ostriches with our heads in the ground if we do not see that this perception is our reality. And maybe it has been around for a long t ime and sometimes we have to pull them out. You know, when I . . . let me tell you. Look, I go to Westgate now in my job, Mr. Speaker, a couple times a week , which is a good experience. More white Anglo- Saxons should probably do that because there are not a lot of white Anglo- Saxons running around there. But when you drive up there to Westgate and you drive in and you look on the right you see a multimillion dollar project going on for a white billionaire’s sport. That is a reality. Africa does not have a crew in the America’s Cup— or any African nation. There are no black sailors running around there . And the bobsled team from J amaica did not hop on a catamaran and start sailing around. When you look to the left -hand side you see the Ireland Rangers Footba ll Club. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: They knocked it down for the America’s Cup.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillLet me know. 576 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly And you look at that side of the field or that side of the road and you have a dilapidated local football club and the big sign as you drive in is B ristol Rovers. I …
Let me know. 576 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly And you look at that side of the field or that side of the road and you have a dilapidated local football club and the big sign as you drive in is B ristol Rovers. I nearly ran the bike into the wall a few times, Mr. Speaker, going , Where aren’t we getting things right and why (this is a rhetorical question I ask m yself) does the perception continue when it does not seem that we can do anything to fix up those fellows’ football club? You can hear a pin drop. R ight? You know, and we have to realise . . . and I will come back to the words of Mahatma G andhi. I had it written up on the board in our office ( Mr. Crockwell will remember ). When the British wanted to keep India British he said to them in the negotiations, I beg you to realise that a people would prefer its own bad gover nance to the good governance of an oppressor . Now, we have to get real with that because what has happened here . . . and I have read this r eport. I spent a lot of time on this. I am a facts guy. I am an evidence guy. That is what I do. When I cross - examine people I will get to the truth. I do not like be-ing misled. I do not like shady facts. I do not like duck and weave and move around . . . it is not me. I do not have the patience for it.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerLet the Honourable Member speak.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillWe have to recognise that when we have a project like this and it is going back and forth and suddenly , at the el eventh hour , we come out with a Blue R ibbon Panel and . . . Gat darn (am I allowed to say that?) , …
We have to recognise that when we have a project like this and it is going back and forth and suddenly , at the el eventh hour , we come out with a Blue R ibbon Panel and . . . Gat darn (am I allowed to say that?) , what a panel ! Let us be honest. It is Blue Ribbon. I know Malcolm Butterfield well. He is a good friend of mine. That is a guy, you know, that we can all say we know him and, you know, Malcolm led the charge on this and they drilled down at the eleventh hour. The one thing I disagree with . . . I am not jumping all over Aecon, because it is not their fault . That is business people; they are doing a deal. A deal is a deal. They are doing a deal. We came to the wicket at the eleventh hour with regard to answering the very valid questions that were being asked about this project. And that Blue Ribbon Panel set it out . How am I for time, Mr. Speaker?
Mr. Mark J. PettingillOkay. But this is the one. So you go all through it . . . Now this is the head. Question answered. Question answered. Question on the facts answered. A nd I am looking at it dispassionately , saying , Is this a commercially sound deal? And I get through …
Okay. But this is the one. So you go all through it . . . Now this is the head. Question answered. Question answered. Question on the facts answered. A nd I am looking at it dispassionately , saying , Is this a commercially sound deal? And I get through it and the whole reason for this speech is because I get down to [the Response to Issue] 17 and it says that “The Panel’s view is that the entire project would have benefited from much clearer disclosure of the transaction, its terms and the partic ipants at a much earlier stage.” And then it goes on to say, “However, . . .” and it concludes “that the substance of this transaction” and so on, is a reasonable commercial deal . So, I am a guy about evidence and facts and third party validation. I had somebody very, very close to me ( still very close to me, I am glad to say ) who had cancer a few years ago. And every day, you know, I talked to her about this , and I would buy he r . . . or we would get these inspiring mugs. I still have them in my office. You know, you come into my office you get a mug with a message on it —Never, never give up! You know, It will be a brighter day , and all of these great messages. Be the change you want to see in the world. You get one of these mugs. And she showed up one day with a mug—she with cancer and me trying to inspire—and her mug said, It is what it is . “It is what it is.” And I have come down to holding that mug on this deal. It is what it is, and it is where it is, and we have to come down and make a business decision on it because it is where it is. But I do not like it. I do not like how we got here.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Mark J. PettingillAnd I do not like . . . hold on. I do not like everything that was done in opposition to this. I vehemently oppose people protesting and blocking admission to this House. It is a criminal offence. I have shared that with my honourable friends on the other side. …
And I do not like . . . hold on. I do not like everything that was done in opposition to this. I vehemently oppose people protesting and blocking admission to this House. It is a criminal offence. I have shared that with my honourable friends on the other side. It did not happen today because some real leadership intervened in that, I believe. It did not happen today. But I had a problem with that, and I had a problem with a lot of things that we have spent time and energy focused on this deal. I did not walk around i n Spring Hill at Warwick, Mr. Speaker, advocating to be the One Bermuda Alliance because we are going to build an airport. I have been to beautiful countries in the world. Beautiful places like Bora Bora where the airport is a shack with straw on it and it has a 1945 baggage conveyor moving around that breaks down every three minutes and a bag comes through. I have been to Maui in Hawaii where the airport is a dump. But you grab your bag and y ou want to run out to get to the beach. So I am not, and have not, been convinced that something we
Bermuda House of Assembly did not run on is so great. But it is what it is, and we are where we are. And it took the time it took to be able to get into the House as I wanted and enc ouraged and have a debate on the issues . . . on the commercial issues. My speech has been something very different to that because everybody else has spoken about the commercial issues of it and so on and so forth. But if we do not take pause and step back —all of us —and look at the heart issue on this, then we have a prob-lem. And the message is this: We cannot succeed as a people if we are going to be all head and no heart. Likewise, Honourable Members on the other side, with all respect, I do not believe we can succeed as a people if we are going to constantly play all em otion and all heart and not always get to the head of things. No disrespect. That is where we get polarised. But one cannot fault people for feeling emotional and expressing that emotion by protest. And I support the protest. It crossed the line for me, but I support it. But I understood it as an Anglo- Saxon. I got it. I respected it. I actually supported it in its refined and proper con-text because it was expressing a view of concern about how this deal was done. So we can look through all 33 pages of it and the one that jumps out at me is the response to I ssue 17 —
Mr. Mark J. Pettingill—that the entire project would have benefitted from much clearer disclosure of the transaction earlier on. We wasted valuable time on this because of Issue 17. It took people bringing parties together and all kinds of things to get us in here today because of Issue 17. So I have …
—that the entire project would have benefitted from much clearer disclosure of the transaction earlier on. We wasted valuable time on this because of Issue 17. It took people bringing parties together and all kinds of things to get us in here today because of Issue 17. So I have to, with my head, look at it and say a t the end of the day, kicking and screaming, because of this Blue Ribbon report it looks like it is commercially sound, and we are where we are and the deal is effectively done and we have to press on. But if we do not stop— all of us and this Government —and recognise that Issue 17 is the big one philosophically and ideologically, and that this heart issue is the big one in this deal, then we have a prob-lem. If we do not drive down the road and look to the one side and see what money is getting poured into something and look to the other side and see what money is not getting poured into something, then we will not succeed as Bermudian people. We will not succeed until we recognise the significance of I ssue 17. Thank you, Mr. Speaker .
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member . Does any other Honourable Member care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 26, MP Neville Tyrrell. You have the floor.
Mr. Neville S. TyrrellMr. Speaker, it is kind of diff icult for me to be the rookie in the House and sit and be quiet and not say anything, but I do want to get my two cents in for what it is worth. Let me preamble my remarks by saying, and I …
Mr. Speaker, it is kind of diff icult for me to be the rookie in the House and sit and be quiet and not say anything, but I do want to get my two cents in for what it is worth. Let me preamble my remarks by saying, and I have heard it several times tonight, you start wrong you end up wrong. So, Mr. Speaker, in my kindness of allowing a lot of my heavyweight honourable colleagues to go ahead of me, because I did want to speak earlier . . . in fact, let me say, Mr. Speaker, that I rose four times. So I think my seat might not be positioned correctly for you, because I have actually . . . this is my fifth time getting to my feet.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, that corner . . . those who have been in that corner will tell you that.
Mr. Neville S. TyrrellWell, let me say, Mr. Speaker— Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: He does not do it on purpose, trust me.
Mr. Neville S. TyrrellYes, right. As I said, Mr. Speaker, I allowed a lot of my heavyweight colleagues to go ahead of me anyway and what it has done is it has actually got me to mark off, on my list, a lot of the points that I want to make. But as …
Yes, right. As I said, Mr. Speaker, I allowed a lot of my heavyweight colleagues to go ahead of me anyway and what it has done is it has actually got me to mark off, on my list, a lot of the points that I want to make. But as I said I want to say something because 20 years from now my grandson is going to ask me, What did you do when that train which you were told left the station already . . . what did you do to try and 578 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly stop it? So I really feel that I need to say something tonight. One of the things that I am going to say is that I am no financial guru. I am not. I know finance, yes, because I can count from one to ten. So I do know about finances. And the fact that this is really a com-plex transaction that has taken place, I am not going to try and jump in and act as if I fully, fully understand it. I do thank the other side for giving me what my co lleagues have said is about 1,000 pages. But it seemed like it was a lot more than that. But if they had just given me, maybe like the executive summary, it probably would have been well enough for me. So I think they wasted a few trees in doing that, to me. Earlier, one of the Honourable Member s on the other side said (and I hope I got the quote right), The Opposition are attempting der ail this project. I have never heard such nonsense in my life. You know, there were words like “debunked” and “vanda lised” against us, as what we are trying to do to this project. And nothing could be further from the truth. Mr. Speaker, for the last almos t 24 months my co lleagues have been trying to explain to the general public, like Mr. and Mrs. Bermuda, exactly what this airport terminal project is really all about. I think we have been talking above their heads about it, so pe ople are confused. They are very much confused about this project. As I said, you know, this is unprecedented, as the Opposition have said. They have given us more information than at any other time. But really, Mr. Speaker, all we were asking for was the financial model and projections and we probably would not have had all this going back and forth, going back and forth had they done it a lot earlier, Mr. Speaker . Let me say that I, like a lot of people, would like to probably have a nice airport in Bermuda. But I do not believe it is the right deal for the right time. I really do not. I think we probably could have done something more, as someone said earlier. We still have to suffer with this airport over the next, what, how long is it going to take to build a new one? We sti ll have to, you know, be in that airport. So what are they going to do? Not going to do any repairs or anything so, in fact, it will eventually fall down around us? So, you know, I just believe that someone has not thought this one right through. These are the words of one of my colleagues on the other side. Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot said about this smells like privatisation. It really does. I believe, and it reminds me of a situation where the bully got bullied by a bigger bully. I think that is really how I can explain it. I am not calling my honourable colleague friend over there a bully. But if the shoe fits . . . but I think he got bullied.
[Laughter]
Mr. Neville S. TyrrellSo, you know, and as the last speaker just said, it is what it is. That is where we are at on this. I think the final point I want to make is that — and this is no disrespect to the Blue Ribbon [Panel]. Most of them are my …
So, you know, and as the last speaker just said, it is what it is. That is where we are at on this. I think the final point I want to make is that — and this is no disrespect to the Blue Ribbon [Panel]. Most of them are my friends. I have known them in other areas. I have played golf with some of them. But I think the Blue Ribbon Panel was just a little too little, too late. It surely should have been done a long time ago. I mean, what are you going to expect when a Blue Ribbon Panel is picked, and in announcing the Blue Ribbon Panel the Minister says that they will come to the same conclusion that I have come to. Well, it is all locked down already, is it not? What do you think they are going to say? Of course, they are going to come back and say it is a commercially sound project. I just think that . . . I hate to say it, but I think they were used. I think the Blue Ribbon Panel might have been used. And I am going to have to face my friends —probably tomorrow when I see them —but as I said there is no disrespect to them. I just think that it is a game the other side is playing and that is the way they have chosen to play the game. But I think that Blue Ribbon Panel was just, you know, just something that was being used. Mr. Speaker, just finally before I si t down, let me say that (and I said it last week the first time I got on my feet) this Government has really burnt up its goodwill. It really has. And this is just another exercise in that role. I am not complaining about where my seat is on this side, Mr . Speaker. But I hope I get a better seat over on that side very shortly.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member . The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 3, MP Lovitta Foggo. You have the floor.
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoThank you, Mr. Speaker . Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, I have to get up and speak this evening. I do stand on behalf of my constituents. I have been canvassing quite a bit and I have a mandate by quite a few people that made it clear …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, I have to get up and speak this evening. I do stand on behalf of my constituents. I have been canvassing quite a bit and I have a mandate by quite a few people that made it clear to me that I needed to be here in this House and vote their will. Regardless of what the outcome is, I will do that job, Mr. Speaker . In saying that, let me just say this. When I am asked to exercise a duty on behalf of those whom I represent, I expect to be able to do that with every piece of information that I need to present proper arBermuda House of Assembly guments. When that is not afforded me, Mr. Speaker, then I feel, regardless of what I am saying here th is evening, that I would never have been able to make the best and proper arguments that I possibly could on behalf of my constituents. All Members who sit in this House have the duty of oversight of the Executive. That is what we were elected for. And I think it is an affront when that will, in my humble opinion, is stolen from me or is being robbed from me. The Member on my side who just took his seat (who sits on the other side) got up and basically said that the way in which this matter has been ha ndled (I am paraphrasing, Mr. Speaker ) has led to much of the public outcry and display that we have seen in these last couple of months. And he is abs olutely right about that. We represent the people and they have every right to express how they feel. And we know —all of us know —because we have been made aware of polls that had been done that by and large our general public still stand against the build of an airport. You can ask . . . the privatisation of an ai rport, Mr. Speaker, to be more correct. We did, in carrying out our parliamentary d uties, get to speak with the CEO of the airport, Mr. A dderley, and one of the main engineers. And, quite frankly, yes, they said that their preference is to have a new build. But when asked very directly if they had the funding that they said would be needed to repair the airport to a state where they thought it would be comparable that that funding to the tune of approx imately $184 million (when they looked at the $154 [million] I think it was and bringing it forward to 2016) they would need $184 million to make an airport that they said would be comparable to a new build. I think it has been made very clear here that the option that we are looking at today is not the only way in which we can build an airport that those who are well versed in the operations of an airport believe would serve the public well. One of the reasons why they said that they would prefer a new build is because they said that they did not want to have to subject the public to the various stages that they might have to where they would have to see an airport in different states of being renovated. But you have heard from many people who have stood to their feet this evening, Mr. Speaker, who have said that they travel in some of the largest airport s—Miami, New York —and you see, when you are walking through those airports, they are in various states of renovation. I know I have, not so very long ago coming through Miami airport. That has never been a deterrent for people travelling. So I would urge the Government. There is another option that they can look at which is a lot cheaper, that keeps the Bermuda airport in the hands . . . or in our hands, I will just put it that way, where we would be able to continue to enjoy the revenues that we earn from that airport that get added to the Consolidated Fund, where we would not have to engage in a situation where we, on this side, Mr. Speaker, believe that it is going to increase the debt to an extent where we think it is going to definit ely have a negative impact on our economy as a whole. We have tried in many ways to explain how we think it will manifest itself in reality in terms of what our people will have to go through. My honourable colleague from constituency 16 basically pointed out that in doing a renovation there is not many opportun ities for many Bermudians to be able to have emplo yment for the next five years or so because, listening to the experts, they did suggest that it would take a few years even in renovating to get that done because of the extensive renovations that would have to be done to bring it to the state that we would want our airport to be. So, Mr. Speaker, I have to speak very directly to Government Members and implore upon them a need, I would say, for them to have a rethink about what it is they are really asking us to do here today when, as I speak and as we sit in this Chamber, we still do not have the full amount of materials that we need to really and truly make a proper debate. It is wholly and totally unacceptable, and I feel like the E xecutive is running away and just doing whatever they want in terms of implementing policies, legislation, that they have decided that they want to see take place for whatever reasons that have made them do this. I do not think that there is any argument that they have provided today that has been sound enough, or that has defended the position to an extent where they have persuaded any of us who do not think that Bermuda can afford this deal to change our minds, and that says a lot. They have not been able to persuade the public, Mr. Speaker, they certainly have not been able to persuade the Members of this House. And I think what has come out of this exercise are many arguments that have at least explained, yet again, why there is so much un- readiness regarding Bermuda entering into a deal like that because we do not see the benefits, and even when we try and u nderstand it from the way in which it has been explained to us, we do not —not just do not see —do not agree that the overall outcome is going to be one that is beneficial for us because we cannot afford to take on a debt like that. Our economy, in comparison to many others around this world, is quite simplistic in that, by and large right now, Mr. Speaker, it is a one -pillar econ omy. An d that certainly is something that we need to take into serious consideration before we do anything that creates a situation that may not provide a more stable condition. I will put it that way, Mr. Speaker . And so I have to ask the Government to r ethink what it is that they are asking for. I think what I am really saying is that there is cause for pause. I think that the wise thing for them to do is pause. Go back to the drawing board and offer Bermuda a better 580 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly deal because I think there is a better deal. We heard one that was spoken of in the Public Accounts Committee. Just that alone is sufficient enough for any, I would think, right -thinking people to stop, reflect, and decide—look, perhaps there is a better way that will be greeted and met by the public with far more acceptance. I think it is clear, Mr. Speaker, that one knows which way I will be voting when I cast my vote, if we are forced to go to that end, if the Government does not decide to halt and perhaps at least entertain a dif-ferent approach. I would urge them to do that; howe ver, Mr. Speaker, failing that, I want to make it very clear to Bermuda and to my constituents that on their behalf I will be voting in support of the way in which they have told me they expect me to do. On that note, Mr. Speaker, I will take my seat.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member . The Chair will now recognise the Minister for Health and Seniors, Minister Atherden. Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: I was going to say good morning, Mr. Speaker, but I guess it is not quite yet.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSeven minutes. Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Mr. Speaker, I want to say to you that I am really glad that we finally have the opportunity to debate this particular Bill and this issue because it has been going on and on and on, and I keep saying, Let ’s get …
Seven minutes. Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Mr. Speaker, I want to say to you that I am really glad that we finally have the opportunity to debate this particular Bill and this issue because it has been going on and on and on, and I keep saying, Let ’s get up here and talk about it. Let ’s stop putting all of these obstacles in our way and get up here and talk about it. So I really am glad to have the opportunity. Mr. Speaker, I realise that to me there are two issues. There is the issue of the handling of the deal and the deal itself. So, I just want to turn around and discuss a little bit of the handling of the deal and then I will talk a bit about the deal itself. Mr. Speak er, one of the dilemmas, I think, has been when you have a deal that is as complicated as this is, to try and get the information out. Because I just want to remind the general public out there that actually today you would think that we were talking about what was being tabled here was the deal itself. But what is actually being tabled here are two Bills. The Airport Authority Act, which is going to talk about the Authority that is created by this deal, and also the Airport Redevelopment Concessions. That is why I want to say, Mr. Speaker, because this deal has been so complicated—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerRight now, we are doing the Bermuda Airport Authority Act. [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: That is what I just said. Sorry, I said I am not sure if the public understood that there are two Acts. I am not saying that we are debat-ing them right now. But …
Right now, we are doing the Bermuda Airport Authority Act.
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: That is what I just said. Sorry, I said I am not sure if the public understood that there are two Acts. I am not saying that we are debat-ing them right now. But we have been talking so much about the deal that I am not sure that the public rea lises that we will be having a further debate when we go into Committee about the Airport Redevelopment Concessions and also about the other Bill, about the . . . we will be talking about the Airport Authority Act which is the first Bill, and then afterwards we will be talking about the Airport Redevelopment Concession Act. As I said, because we have been talking so much about the deal, I am not certain whether the public realises that the first thing that we will be debat-ing will be the Airport Authority Act, and we are debat-ing it because the Airport Authority Act is how this deal creates an Authority whereby Bermuda is going to have our airport operated by another company which we are going to create. As I say . . . and, sorry, Mr. Speaker, I am not certain why someone has been interpolating to me when I am trying to talk to you—
[Laughter and inaudible interjections ]
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Okay, so, Mr. Speaker, my concern is the fact that when I say we are talking about the deal, we have had lots of information— [Inaudible interjection] [Gavel] Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: We have had lots of i nformation that has been given out to us to try and make us understand about this deal and the complex ities of it. Lots of people might not remember that. Leaving aside the fact of the CCC and the Bermuda Government, the two things that I believe are partic ularly relevant for us to remember are that Aecon is going to build the airport for us and the quango is now going to be the authority that is going to make sure that the airport is operated correctly. The only other piece which is in that is the fact that in order to have the airport built it is necessary for us to have financing to make sure that sufficient funds are generated. As we have been talking about this and as everybody has been trying to wrap their mind around it, I am just reminded of how much information has been put out about the deal. And I have not been sp ecifically involved in all of the deals because to me, Mr. Speaker, there has been a committee that has been looking at it on a regular basis and looking at the fine details. But I have had the opportunity to be able to have the quizzing of the committee and ask the ques-tions and be able to get a clear understanding of how the deal works and what is important.
Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Speaker, while I say that it seems to me that the issues have been . . . the handling of the deal versus the deal itself, when we talked about the ha ndling of the deal, I remember the Opposition asking lots and lots of questions and saying Well, what about this? And then the Finance Minister would come around and he would give them some more information. What about that? The Finance Minister would go back and try and find out whether the other party to the deal would allow him. But there is one thing that I want to say that I think is important that the community understands. The Opposition Leader who is the [Shadow] Finance Minister as well as the Opposition Leader, kept going on about, We don’t have this information. It needs to be looked at. How can we look at it? Why can’t it be given to the Audi tor? I know that the Auditor had ind icated that they did not have the staff and, therefore, it was out of their remit. And I thought to myself, if that is something that they do not have the staff and it is out of their remit, why do they keep going on about som ething that is not going to happen? So when the Blue Ribbon [Panel] was created, I thought, hopefully the Opposition will finally feel, Here is someone that is not the Minister . Here is somebody else that has the similar, what I would call the type of independence that the Opposition would feel that this committee would be sufficient to look at it and allay their fears. But even now after the Blue Ri bbon Panel has come up, I still do not hear the Oppos ition turning around and saying, O kay, that is fine. I will live with that. From my perspective, Mr. Speaker, when I looked at the fact that there was a previous entity that looked at this, that dealt with the value for money and dealt with the principle of was this good for Bermuda . . . because I am reminded that the UK Government wanted to make sure that the entrustment letter was taken care of and issues about value and issues about making sure that the deal was at a level before they allowed us to progress down this path. So, Mr. Speaker, for me, I am saying that there were lots of various steps whereby this whole question of the deal, whether it was an appropriate deal for Bermuda and whether it was going to be value for money, had been dealt with. From my perspective, I did not have a problem and I still do not have a problem. Mr. Speaker, when I look at that perspective, I realise that the other side of all of this is actually the deal itself, because I have been out and I go on the doorstep and I have been speaking to people in my constituency, people in other constituencies, and they try and look at the deal and they try and explain it. As I have said to my colleagues, and I have said to some others, we have to try and take it away from just look-ing at the fact of the airport, because when you s tart to look at the airport perhaps everybody cannot relate to it because it is the airport. But when you start talking about it, if it was a building that you had and you wanted to have som eone to turn around and renovate it for you and allow them to live in it and collect the revenues . . . lots of people, when we start to discuss that they can think about it and they can understand and they can appr eciate, the fact that, Hey, yes, I would be able to enter into a transaction and have someone turn around and say to me, ‘Oh, there is my building over there. Yes, I am prepared to turn around and renovate it for you for this amount and let me collect the rentals from all your tenants ’ . . . therefore, that is a good idea. And when I start to talk to them they say, You are right. Because if they do that I will not have to turn around and renovate it. I will then not have to turn around and reach into my pocket to be able to come up with the construction costs which I do not have. I would not be able to turn around and be able to make sure that it happens. And they stop and think about it and they say, That’s a good deal. And when they start to have the caveat in there that says not only will they do that but they will tell me this is the amount that I am going to renovate it for, this is when I am going to have it ready, and I will know that I will not have to spend out any more money, they get it. They say to them, Hey, yes, I will do that because I believe it minimises the risk that I have and if I am already maxed out with my credit cards and my loans and my mortgages, this is the way that I am going to turn around and get my property up to the level that I need. But do you know what they also realise, Mr. Speaker? That after the 30 years I will also be able to turn around and say, Thank you very much. Goodbye . I now have my building and I can then continue to operate my building, collect my rents, and I still own it. And so, Mr. Speaker, for many people, that allowed them to turn around and understand the deal. Mr. Speaker, when I look at the whole question about why are we doing this and the fact of the deal itself, I then came down to the other problem that the Opposition still seems to have, which is the ques-tion of the financial model. What is the model that the individual has, and what type of profitability have they generated in order to come up with this? I have had a conversation with some of them, I said, I do not expect to know the financial model of that individual when he says to me I am going to operate this buil ding. I am going to renovate this building for this price. He is not going to tell me what is t he implied operation profitability that he thinks he is going to have. That is his business. I am not to know whether he has some construction materials that he has access to, whether he has fair capacity and needs to use his resources and not keep them idle. All I know and I need to know is how much he is going to charge me and when is it going to be done. I just want to say to everybody, because the audience out there has to realise this is not something 582 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly that would normally be known in a deal. It would no t be known. So to talk about saying that somebody is going to tell you what their profitability is, we are not being real. We are not being real, Mr. Speaker, and, therefore, I am concerned that the general public out there seems to be distracted and thinks that when we are asking for this that they are not being given som ething that they should expect to have. They should not expect to have it. What they should expect to know is can this be built on time and on budget. The reason they need to know that is because we do not have a good track record of being able to bring it in on time and on budget. When you are up against your financial max you cannot afford to turn around and get halfway into doing something and find out that it is going to cost something more, which you do not have, and you are going to run out of mon-ey. So, Mr. Speaker, those are some of the things that I wanted to draw to our attention. But you know, Mr. Speaker, the other part that worries me is that we keep talking about whether this is the right deal at the right time and whether we are not going to do som ething else, and all I can say to you, Mr. Speaker, the reason the Government has two pockets, which is what I would call the capital expenditure pocket and the current account poc ket, is because you find money for current account differently from things that you start to budget for capital. The things that we are talking about with r espect to what we have to do with our vulnerable peo-ple—what we have to do with our seniors, what w e have to do with those individuals —that is going to come out of current account. The Finance Minister has been holding his budget looking for money, trying to make sure that we have current account money to deal with our seniors, our citizens, all of the things that we want to do to make sure that it happens. We should not have the population feeling that just be-cause we are going to go ahead with this building of the airport that that automatically means that the kitty is going to have nothing to deal with, what I call the issues that are related to the heart. And that is why I say the head was talking about what we were going to deal with the airport. The heart was talking about all of our vulnerable people, all of the people that do not have —I think people are talking about they are going to have things, teachers turning around and not being able to photocopy things —those are things that are related to current account. So when we come up with a budget we will be talking about what we are going to do, how we are going to make sure that things are expanded, and how we are going to make sure that those issues are addressed. I am really concerned. As I say, we are not f ocusing on what is here today. And I really believe, Mr. Speaker, that by and large when w e started with all of this . . . and I really felt from the very beginning that the Opposition were not being as . . . and I am going to use the words. My feeling was that the Opposition were not being as fair and honest with their . . . the reason why they did not like this project . . . and this is my opinion. I felt that they were not being truthful about this because I believe they knew that if we could get this deal going . . . and I do not want to say “deal” b ecause, as one of my colleagues tells me, if we could get this project going—not having something that was going to affect our budget, not having something that was going to affect the timing, that would deliver on some jobs, that that would make the population realise that we were still trying to do the work of delivering on things that could create jobs in Bermuda, that we were still trying to recognise that by creating jobs and giving people the opportunities —that we were delivering on our mandate. I believe, Mr. Speaker, a lot of the angst fr om the Opposition side was because we looked like we were suddenly going to turn around and do something that was important, that we were suddenly going to create jobs that were going to allow people to have careers; that once the construction was over the y would have careers in the airport management, they would have the opportunity to turn around and have new skills. So for me, Mr. Speaker, when I looked at all of this I believe that because the Opposition were not being honest about why they did not want this. They actually started to throw out lots of red herrings which were, Well, why can’t we have this? Or why can’t somebody else look at this So I am glad, Mr. Speaker, that now we have finally gotten to the stage where we can have a good debate. And I was really pleased that when the Blue Ribbon Panel came up that one of their Members said . . . and I do not realise whether everybody else agreed with what he said, but he said, okay, now finally we can have a good debate. And I was heartened. But I also heard somebody come right behind him and say, Oh no, we don’t have this information. We are not going to debate it . Mr. Speaker, I have been very disappointed that we have been using the people of Bermuda as pawns in this whole airport project because th ey have been used as pawns. Instead of saying, Get up here and let us discuss it in a debate, we have been sa ying, Let’s make sure that we cannot get up here and have a debate. Let ’s get them out there and turn around and make sure there are obstacles. We showed up, big enough and brave enough to come up here and say with the information that we have available to us, knowing what it is supposed to do, knowing what the aims are, are we in a position to make a decision on this project to say that it is goi ng to be a good thing for Bermuda, and I truly believe, Mr. Speaker, that we have gotten to the stage where right now we have the information. We have had many things looked at.
Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Speaker, if we could do things differently, and hindsight is always 20/20, yes, maybe we would have done some of the things differently. But I think we are at a stage right now where we know about the deal. We know about why it is going to benefit Berm uda. We know about the caveats to make sure that our credit line, our ceiling, our credit limits are protected. We have the opportunity for jobs. And I must admit, Mr. Speaker, that I do not get hung up so much about whether we said percentage A somewhere that was 20 months down, and now we have come up with some other percentage because these things always have to look at when you start off what you think is going to happen and then by the time you discuss it and time has gone by, you suddenly realise that other factors come into play. So, from my perspective know-ing that there is the opportunity for two things: There are going to be more jobs, and if it is 60 per cent we start off with 60, we get on with it. That is 60 more than what is there. And on top of that, once the airport operations are then going, we will have more Berm udians to have some of the more jobs that will be cr eated by the airport. So, Mr. Speaker, for me, I am glad and I am looking forward to the rest of the debate because I believe that it is time. It is time . . . you know that expression, We need to put up or shut up. So it is time for us to get started and, Mr. Speaker, I am glad that we are here today to get on with this. Thank you, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member . Any other Member care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Deputy Leader of the Opposition from constituency 15, and the Shadow Minister for National Security, MP Roban. You have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Mr. Speaker . Entering the House under the cover of dar kness — Some Hon. Member s: Ooh!
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberLike thieves in the night.
Mr. Walter H. RobanOr perhaps a thief in the night seeking to prey on a helpless victim. Or perhaps an animal afraid of what the light might reveal to all. E ntering the House of Parliament in the darkness of the night . . . What does it say about our democracy, Mr. …
Or perhaps a thief in the night seeking to prey on a helpless victim. Or perhaps an animal afraid of what the light might reveal to all. E ntering the House of Parliament in the darkness of the night . . . What does it say about our democracy, Mr. Speaker ? What does it say about where we are? What does this say about the road that we have tak-en? What does this say about what we have become? I ask the OBA, Is this the Bermuda you promised? The new politics that you proclaimed that you would bring?
Mr. Walter H. RobanMr. Speaker, is this the politics that we were promised in a newer Bermuda under the One Bermuda Alliance? Where the Government sneaks into the chamber of public business in the darkness of night —
Mr. Walter H. RobanThey danced, they pranced, they jumped; they skipped, they hopped, they slit hered like a snake in the ocean . . . I do not know, other than they came here in the darkness of night. Pr esumably hiding from those who would see them. That would be the people …
They danced, they pranced, they jumped; they skipped, they hopped, they slit hered like a snake in the ocean . . . I do not know, other than they came here in the darkness of night. Pr esumably hiding from those who would see them. That would be the people of Bermuda . . . and here they are.
Mr. Walt er H. RobanAbsolutely wonderful. What a wonderful democracy we have become where Go v584 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly ernment as leaders must hide from the electorate in order to do their business. [Inaudibl e interjection]
Mr. Wa
lter H. RobanIf I am saying something that is wrong, I am happy to take a point of order, Mr. Speaker . But it is not. This is what happened. Hon. Sy lvan D. Richards, Jr.: Point of o rder, Mr. Speaker
Mr. Wa
lter H. RobanThis is what we know happened this morning. The Speake r: Yes? Hon. Sy lvan D. Richards, Jr.: Point of order, Mr. Speaker . The Speake r: Yes, what is the point of order? POINT OF ORDER Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: I walked in the House at five o’clock …
This is what we know happened this morning. The Speake r: Yes? Hon. Sy lvan D. Richards, Jr.: Point of order, Mr. Speaker . The Speake r: Yes, what is the point of order? POINT OF ORDER Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: I walked in the House at five o’clock in the morning, there was nobody out there. There was nobody to hide from. [Laughter] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Everybody was sleeping. The Sp eaker: Thank you. Thank you, Honourable Member. Thank you, thank you. [Laughter and ge neral uproar ]
Mr. Walter H. RobanMr. Speaker , I will do my best to contain myself from reacting to that — [Missin g audio]
Mr. Wa
lter H. Roban—in a paddy wagon, Mr. Speaker . They had to contemplate entering the House in a paddy wagon. A vehicle that to many symbolises oppression—state oppression— in some cases vi olence of the state against the weak, those who seek to challenge authority against oppression. That vehicle symbolises much for …
—in a paddy wagon, Mr. Speaker . They had to contemplate entering the House in a paddy wagon. A vehicle that to many symbolises oppression—state oppression— in some cases vi olence of the state against the weak, those who seek to challenge authority against oppression. That vehicle symbolises much for many of our people, particularly those who would have witnessed other times in our history like 1965 and 1977, or perhaps even S outh Africa; perhaps places like Angola; places like Sharpsville; [and] places like Montgomery, Alabama. An Hon . Member: Soweto.
Mr. Wa
lter H. RobanSoweto. This is a democracy we have come to, Mr. Speaker, in order to pass a Bill or a set of Bills that will transform the ownership, the operation of our airport. That is part of the path that has been taken. We have December 2nd as a clear example …
Soweto. This is a democracy we have come to, Mr. Speaker, in order to pass a Bill or a set of Bills that will transform the ownership, the operation of our airport. That is part of the path that has been taken. We have December 2nd as a clear example of the path. But here we are in this House to deal with this business. But, Mr. Speaker, this has not been a comfortable path for any of us around such important leg-islation. We have also seen some other things, Mr. Speaker, some of which has been described by my colleagues and are a matter of public record, such things as the disregarding of Financial Instructions in order to make the deal work. Certainly, the allegation that there was misleading by omission —there is another word that was used in this (I would prefer to stay away from words like “ lies” and other things, stay away from words like that). Misleading by omission of key civil servants in the process. We have even seen offices that were designed to have an eye on such Government proposals, like the Office of Procur ement, disregarded, Mr. Speaker . We have seen the Public Accounts Commi ttee disregarded in its request, Mr. Speaker . We have seen departments of Government, organs of our gov-ernance, disregarded, Mr. Speaker, to make this work as the Government wishes it to. This is the democracy that we have come to, Mr. Speaker. And I ask again, Is this the Bermuda that the One Bermuda Alliance has sought to create? That they promised prior to D ecember 2012? Is this the Bermuda of transparency, openness, and accountability, Mr. Speaker? I think it is a very sim ple question around this arrangement related to this Bill, the Airport Authority Act 2017 that we are debating. One of two key pieces of legislation. The Honourable Finance Minister has, in his own style of eloquence, put forth an argument today that there has been much transparency, Mr. Speaker . And there are 1,000 pages to prove it, Mr. Speaker . But have the 1,000 pages come forth willingly? Have these 1,000 pages come forth without demand? No. We will contend, Mr. Speaker, that those 1,000 pages did not come without the Minister and his Government being forced to present them by the demands of the Public Accounts Committee; by the efforts of many who were critics of this particular project and the ar-rangement as proposed in November 2014. Those 1,000 pages have not come out of the goodness of the heart of the One Bermuda Alliance and the F inance Minister. They came because there were d emands made; there were questions asked. There were things done that were actually a part of what our democracy requires. But the One Bermuda Alliance and its Members would paint this as being obstruction, conspiring to undermine the project. I have heard some Members even suggest that we are trying to undermine the run-ning of the country itself because we were a part of the effort to question, to critique, to demand answers.
Bermuda House of Assembly Especially in the light, Mr. Speaker, that prior to N ovember 2014 this was not even in the OBA’s plan, Throne Speeches, or things that we can at least have some indication of the direction of the Governm ent. It came out of nowhere. We were presented one day with the Minister and somebody from CCC signing an MOU telling us we are building an airport. That demanded answers to critique and questions by those who wanted to know why. And those efforts have been portrayed by this Government as being designed to undermine, to con-spire things, to disrupt, when they are actually actions that democracy demands. But I ask the question, I guess the democracy that the OBA wanted, Mr. Speaker, was a democracy where no one asked questions, no one was acquitted, and no one wanted clarity. That is the type of democ-racy they wanted. They did not want the other form of democracy that demanded transparency, openness, and accountability. Because that is not what we have seen with this project. That is not what we have seen with this proposal for the past almost two years. So, Mr. Speaker, we would not have had the Entrustment Report without demands. We would not have had the Deloitte Report without demands. We would not have had the disclosure of documents such as the Project Agreement without a demand. There is no way and no one can make me believe in any form that the Government would have disclosed all this in-formation without the demands that have been made by persons wi thin the Government structure and those people outside. We must credit many for this effort. Not just the PLP. There were others out there who made sim ilar efforts, some of them individuals of this community who just did it on their own volition—not any p artisan volition. That suggests, at least aspects of our democ-racy have gotten better despite the One Bermuda All iance. So, this has not been an easy road for any of us. We have even seen in the effort to provide their version of clarity, Mr. Speaker , a B lue Ribbon Panel — nice, nice, nice title for a group—gentlemen and lady of eminent experience, character and expertise. But, Mr. Speaker, I cannot help with that effort seeing it as a part of what I saw as a pattern. A pattern, essentially from the very beginning, evidenced by the conduct and behaviour of this Government with essential ent ities such as the Office of Accountant General, such as the Office of Public Procurement, such as the Public Accounts Committee, Mr. Speaker, an effort to b ypass, to deviate from and to deny the legitimacy of certain processes; to deny the legitimacy of the cr itique from the Public Accounts Committee, to disr egard the role of the Office of Project Management and Procurement, to in some cases even mislead the A ccountant General in order to make this work. Is this the democracy we desire? Is this what we envision for ourselves, Mr. Speaker? Paddy wag-ons? Moving in the secrecy of darkness? Is this what has been the product of this effort and that is why statements like, Y ou start wrong you end wrong . And I do not even need to go back, Mr. Speaker, to what has been discovered about how this all started. There are persons tonight and during this debate who have outlined it clearly, that journey, which is clearly out there for anyone to see. I go back to the Blue Ribbon Panel, Mr. Speaker . Again, eminent gentlemen and lady of exp erience, professionalism, and ability. But politically, I have something else to say. They have sadly been a part of the effort by this Government to bypass the authority of power, to bypass that authority which has now been th e Public Accounts Committee and other structures in order to legitimise their path for this whole project. A sad process of manipulation that was repugnant in my view to the authority of this Parli ament, to the governance of this country — [Inaudible inter jection] [Gavel]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou have had your say, Honourable Whip. I do not want to hear about it. I want to hear MP Roban. Carry on.
Mr. Walter H. RobanMr. Speaker, two legitimate processes upon which we have come to rely to ensure transparency, openness, and accountability. The Blue Ribbon Panel was a tool that was dishonourable to those, in my view, who were on it because it was not done in order for the Government to submit itself …
Mr. Speaker, two legitimate processes upon which we have come to rely to ensure transparency, openness, and accountability. The Blue Ribbon Panel was a tool that was dishonourable to those, in my view, who were on it because it was not done in order for the Government to submit itself to the legitimate process that we have demanded that this project be subject to. Whether it be our request to have the Auditor General involved . . . that was in order to submit this process to the full weight of what the Government can do through the Auditor General. As an objective, a truly legitimate, constitutional objective entity within the Government structure. It was never to bypass. And frankly, in my view the work of the Blue Ribbon Panel has little bearing based on some of the events that came after its creation to the process anymore. Its findings are interesting. They certainly are credible based on the criteria upon which they were given, but how does it influence the decisions that we are making today? None. Little, if any. Because sadly from my view from where I stand, they were used as a way to bypass what was already the legitimate pr ocess of accountability which this Government should have followed. How much more time do I have, Mr. Speaker ?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerA minute and 13 seconds. 586 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Walter H. Roban: So I contend, Mr. Speaker, that as many have said, this particular proposal started wrong. In many ways it continues to be wrong, and much of the right has been …
A minute and 13 seconds.
586 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Walter H. Roban: So I contend, Mr. Speaker, that as many have said, this particular proposal started wrong. In many ways it continues to be wrong, and much of the right has been brought into it because of the pressure of those who seek to critique, to ask the questions, and want answers. That is what has brought the right back into the process. And we on this side and those who are not in this Chamber will continue to do that. And we will con-tinue to fulfil our role in this and ensure whatever ha ppens with this project it will be in the best interests of this country whether these Bills get passed or not or whatever happens thereafter because it does not stop here. It will continue onto whatever happens with the airport, whatever happens with this legislation and whatever, because the country’s welfare is at stake. We in this House have an obligation —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Minister for the Environment, Minister Cole Simons. You have the floor. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the theatrical antics of my colleague who just spoke pr eviously. He …
Thank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Minister for the Environment, Minister Cole Simons. You have the floor. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the theatrical antics of my colleague who just spoke pr eviously. He should save those antics for the theatre. Drama at its best. Very entertaining. But, Mr. Speaker, I could not let some of his comments go un- noted. In regard to entering the House under the veil of darkness, animals afraid . . . all of the Members of Parliament coming to the House at 5:00 am. May I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that he and his team get their facts accurately. What time did I come is the question. Mr. Speaker, truth be told, at seven o’clock his morning I was in my shower.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberToo much, too much! [Laughter] Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: I was in my shower at home, truth be told. So this issue about MPs being in the House at five o’clock is questionable. You all get your facts straight. Misleading the public yet again, Mr. Speaker . So guys, …
Too much, too much!
[Laughter]
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: I was in my shower at home, truth be told. So this issue about MPs being in the House at five o’clock is questionable. You all get your facts straight. Misleading the public yet again, Mr. Speaker . So guys, when you make these profound all egations, do your research because, again—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust a minute, just a minute. Have a seat. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: And that is the Whip, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member , let us not let that happen again. Carry on. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . The One Bermuda Alliance Government is about getting the peoples’ work done. And we have done what we thought was appropriate today to deli ver on the goods. …
Honourable Member , let us not let that happen again. Carry on. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . The One Bermuda Alliance Government is about getting the peoples’ work done. And we have done what we thought was appropriate today to deli ver on the goods. Mr. Speaker, a lot has been said about the project itself —the contents of the Agreement. We have spoken about how it adds value. We are talking about direct infrastructure investments in this country which, in fact, it is. We all know that the building and assets will belong to Bermuda. We all agree on that. We also know that this will not add a credit burden to our challenging financial situation. We all agree on that. We also note that the Blue Ribbon Panel, an i ndependent body, gave an assessment. It may not be what the Opposition wants to hear, but I think the community are confident that we are moving in the right direction and the proposition makes great co mmercial sense. Mr. Speaker, those things we can agree upon. But my main reason for getting up this evening is to make a few brief comments. This project has been around for two years. I was in the Public Accounts Committee when I began to get intimately involved in this project. And we have talked about process, we have talked about tendering, we have talked about passing the contract on to the Auditor General for an assessment of value for money. Mr. Speaker, these things to me were a diversion. The PLP are saying that they are positioning themselves to be the next Government, but they are not acting like they want to be the next Government, Mr. Speaker. What I was waiting for is, Listen, the OBA has presented a plan for an airport. Surely the next Government or someone positioning themselves to be the next Government would have presented an alternative.
Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. W. Lawrence Scott: Point of o rder, Mr. Speaker
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Honourable Member. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottThe Honourable Member is misleading the House. The plan that the OBA is pr esenting is a perverted plan of the PLP. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Okay, then, Mr. Speaker , I would like to respond to that. Then table that plan so the people of Bermuda can see …
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottPoint of o rder, Mr. Speaker. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: It cannot be a point of order again.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottNo, it is because . . . Mr. Speaker, I actually had a motion in March of 2014 putting forth our plan which we have debated.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Speaker, as I said, t able the plan. Mr. Speaker, even if they disagree with our plan they did not think about value. If they were r esponsible and serious about being the next Gover nment, they would have said, Bermuda, this …
Carry on.
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Speaker, as I said, t able the plan. Mr. Speaker, even if they disagree with our plan they did not think about value. If they were r esponsible and serious about being the next Gover nment, they would have said, Bermuda, this is what the OBA is offering. This is what [we] are offering. Look at it yoursel ves. This is ho w we think it is going to be financed. This is the best proposition for the country. Even if you took the dust off the PLP plan that cost an estimated $500- something million three years ago that you guys put together . . . bring that out. Blow the dust off. But, no, they have not even presented this. All they have been talking about is process, pr ocess, process. More information. Well, let me make it clear. We are about delivering services. We are about delivering results. And we are going to deliver on this airport. The country believes that this is the right d irection that we are going to head towards, Mr. Speak-er—68 [per cent] to 70 per cent of the Bermudians of this country have said they have had enough infor-mation, we have discussed this long enough, get on and get the job done. Mr. Speaker, as someone said earlier, we had a swimming team here a few months ago. They saw the ad that Bermuda was the place to come for winter training. They came here and they almost froze themselves to death. And the da y that they were leaving we had torrential rains at the airport. For some reason someone was at the airport and interviewed them when they left. And the head coach said, This is totally unacceptable. You present yourself as a world- class destination and the rain that is coming through these ceilings is like Niagara Falls . There was so much water. In fact, I have seen it for myself. The last few times I went away there were about 50 buckets on the top floor and you see the water dripping, dripping, dripping, dripping. Now, you can say that this is an OBA problem. But this problem has not been addressed for the past 20 years. Twenty years and nothing has been done on the PLP side, and we are doing our best to remedy what we have found. A bad situation and a bad infr astructure for this country, Mr. Speaker Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, if they were serious about providing an alternative then they could have tabled their plan. Mr. Speaker, when I was away on a business trip, I raised the issue of value for money reports. It was all very fortuitous. At that meeting overseas, Mr. Speaker, I met with some Canadians. And I did not know their involvement in this process. The Canadian that I met said to me, Cole, let me come straight with you. I worked for CCC and the only person that can give you value for money is someone that has done this deal before. The fact that the Opposition Leader has referred this matter to the Auditor General to come up with a report to ensure that the country has received value for money , he said to me, is absolute nonsense. She is not qualified to do it. In fact, the Auditor General herself said, I am not qualified to do this report. I am not authorised to do this report and I do not have the resources to do this report. So I said to this Canadian gentleman who worked for CCC, So, how would you do it? How would you go about getting a value for money [report]? And he said to me, Cole, have you heard of a process called the Swiss challenge? I said, N o. Quite frankly, no I have not. So he said, Well, I would suggest that the O pposition, if they want to ensure that the country gets value for money mount a Swiss challenge. Well, for those in the audience, for my Members that are here today, our colleagues, a Swiss challenge will operate like this: there are plans in place that are prepared to date by Government. We will hand those plans over to the Opposition and say to them, Guys, these are the plans that we want to present to develop the airport for Bermuda. If you feel that we do not have value for money, you take these plans and go to another developer, go to another con-struction company, go to another infrastructure inves-tor and see what they can do and price that out .
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainPoint of order. Point of order, Mr. Speaker . I believe the Member is misleading the House, but not intentionally. A Swiss challenge involves you 588 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly revealing all of the documents that a contractor has given you, including the plans …
Point of order. Point of order, Mr. Speaker . I believe the Member is misleading the House, but not intentionally. A Swiss challenge involves you 588 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly revealing all of the documents that a contractor has given you, including the plans to develo p, including their financing, and you allow someone else to say I can beat that.
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you for the clarity. Had you put forward that recommendation we may have allowed it to happen.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member — [Inaudible interjection]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerJust a minute. What is the point? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainPoint of order. I believe, again, the Minister is misleading the House because it is known and it has been said that the complete fina ncial model has not been put forward. So we cannot present it to anybody.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerCarry on, please. Hon. N. H. Co le Simons: I am not talking about the financial model. I am talking about a blueprint plan— [Inaudible interjections] Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: A blueprint plan that will ask us— [Gavel] Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: A blueprint plan that you can …
Carry on, please. Hon. N. H. Co le Simons: I am not talking about the financial model. I am talking about a blueprint plan— [Inaudible interjections] Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: A blueprint plan that will ask us—
[Gavel]
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: A blueprint plan that you can pick up and s ay, This is what we are building, this is how we are building it . We are not talking about f inances. We are talking about this is the physical struc ture that I want. These are the terms and conditions of the structure that I want , and I want you to come up and price this out. It is like taking an architectural plan to three contractors and asking them, please, look at this and come up with a—
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainPoint of o rder, Mr. Speaker, point of order. He is completely wrong and if you will allow me, Mr. Speaker —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPlease. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Speaker , if they have already done it, again I will ask them to table evidence that they have asked us for a Swiss challenge. So, Mr. Speaker — Hon. E. David Burt: Mr. Speaker , point of order — Hon. N. H. …
Please.
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Speaker , if they have already done it, again I will ask them to table evidence that they have asked us for a Swiss challenge. So, Mr. Speaker — Hon. E. David Burt: Mr. Speaker , point of order — Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: It feeds back into, Mr. Speaker —
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Hon. E. David Burt: Point of order, Mr. Speaker . The Honourable Member is misleading the House. On a very simple point is that number one, the Progressive Labour Party in 2016 —or probably even 2015 —proposed a Swiss c hallenge. But furthermore, the Honourable Member may not be aware that the Airport Development Agreement signed by his Mini ster of Finance forbids a Swiss challenge or else they can get out of the deal and charge us a penalty.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right, thank you, thank you, thank you. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: They forbid a Swiss Cha llenge? Is this a democracy? [Laughter and inaudible interjections ] Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Sp eak er—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member — [Inaudible interjections] Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Speaker —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGet off of that point. [Laughter] Bermuda House of Assembly The Speaker: Stand up and get off that . . . just get off that— [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGo to another point, Honourable Member. [Laughter and inaudib le interjections ]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerGo to another point. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Speaker — [Inaudible interjections] [Gavel]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member — Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: As I said earlier, my point is this. We have talked about process, process, process, and this Opposition has presented no alternative to this country. [Inaudible interjections] Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: And if they are supposedly Government in waiting, …
Thank you, Honourable Member — Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: As I said earlier, my point is this. We have talked about process, process, process, and this Opposition has presented no alternative to this country.
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: And if they are supposedly Government in waiting, then surely they could have presented another option.
Hon. E. David Burt: Point of order, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. E. David Burt: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. If he would like me to provide Budget Replies and Throne Speech Replies by the Progressive Labour Party, I am more than [willing] to give him those. But he cannot go ahead and say …
Yes.
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. E. David Burt: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. If he would like me to provide Budget Replies and Throne Speech Replies by the Progressive Labour Party, I am more than [willing] to give him those. But he cannot go ahead and say there is no alternative. He does not like the alternative, bu t he cannot say there is no alternative.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Speaker , I will say it again. The only alternative that has been evidenced to this community in regard to a structural plan, even though it was in draft form, was the plan presented by Wendell Hollis and Mr. [Andrew] Outerbridge. There …
Thank you. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Speaker , I will say it again. The only alternative that has been evidenced to this community in regard to a structural plan, even though it was in draft form, was the plan presented by Wendell Hollis and Mr. [Andrew] Outerbridge. There has been no other plan tabled in this House that the community can take hold of to say, I can choose between the Opposition development plan for the airport and a Government one. To date, nothing has been presented. Now, Mr. Speaker, I will move on to my next section. Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Shadow Atto rney General spoke about meat and potatoes and the details. And we have talked about this time and time again. I was thinking how can I make it simple for the average person in the street to understand, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, if I have a two- acre property and someone came to me and said, Mr. Simons, I would like to build a 10- apartment condo on that two- acre property and you can have it in 20 years. I will pay you a rent of $50,000 a year for the property itself and at the end of 20 years, I will give you the 10- apartment condo and it is yours. You will take full title of it. In the meantime, I will get my return on the cost of building the condos and then off to the next investment after-wards . So he and I will sit down and agree on the contract and if I, as the owner, think that this business opportunity makes sense, then I will sign it. Now, to me, Mr. Speaker, what he does behind the scene is none of my business. But if I am sat-isfied that I am getting value, that he is going to build this property, he is going to provide maintenance for 20 years, and I will have an asset that is triple the va lue that it is after 20 years, and I am satisfied with that investment, then I will sign on the dotted line and move forward. It is none of my business how he builds it, as long as I am satisfied that the investment makes sense and going forward my property will be greatly appreciated. So, again, Mr. Speaker, from a business point of view, if the parties in question agree that there is substantive value for money and the investment makes sense, then we just sign on the dotted line and move forward. The investor does not need to know what my motivation is; I do not need to know what his motivation is in how he has done his calculations to come up with the investments. But I, as the owner of the property, if I am satisfied that this is what is of val-ue to me and my family for the next 30 years and it makes sense from a business point of view, I take a little advice and it makes sense from a business point of view for my family, then I move ahead. The airport is a similar project, Mr. Speaker . It is off the balance sheet. I do not have to put any mon-ey down on my investment and, yes, if I do not have to put any money down then somehow this developer has to get his investment back. And I will allow that for 20 years. [Timer bee ps]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Hon. N. H. Cole Simons : Because I will have the asset at the end.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThat is it. That is it. That is it. 590 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 33, MP Jamahl Simmons. You have the floor.
Mr. Jamahl S. Sim monsThank you, Mr. Speaker, and good morning, Bermuda! Good morning! Mr. Speaker, watching that Honourable Member bumble through his script reminded me of a line from Pinocchio as I rose to my feet: Ain’t no strings on me. Ain’t no strings on me. [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Ja mahl S. SimmonsMr. Speaker, one of my good friends has a saying. He says, there is no good decision or idea that is produced after 9:00 pm. And I can assume it only gets worse after midnight! [Laughter]
Mr. Jamahl S. Sim monsAnd we are about to make a bad decision long after 9:00 pm, long past midnight, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member who just took his seat took great pride that at 7:00 am he was in his shower. But, Mr. Speaker, the people do not care what …
And we are about to make a bad decision long after 9:00 pm, long past midnight, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member who just took his seat took great pride that at 7:00 am he was in his shower. But, Mr. Speaker, the people do not care what time he came to the House. The people do care, however, about Members who have admitted that they wanted to come when nobody was here. But, Mr. Speaker, let us be assured that the people they avoided, the people they quit (my words) in fear of, [they] will be there and unavoidable on election day. You cannot slip in early and hope to beat the crowd on election day. So the paying people who you considered protecting yourself in the confines of a paddy wagon, a vehicle that normally travels to this building carrying criminals, Mr. Speaker — [Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Jamahl S. Sim monsWell, yes, my Honourable Member said alleged criminals , well . . . Mr. Speaker, there is a saying the people should never be afraid of their Government. But Go vernments should fear their people. In my opinion, Mr. Speaker, the Government has got something right. They are afraid of …
Well, yes, my Honourable Member said alleged criminals , well . . . Mr. Speaker, there is a saying the people should never be afraid of their Government. But Go vernments should fear their people. In my opinion, Mr. Speaker, the Government has got something right. They are afraid of the people, Mr. Speaker . In my opinion, they are afraid because they know that when they look the people in the eye, that little script that they have all read through and bumbled through t onight will not be there to help them. The people want you to look them in the eye and tell the truth. They want you to look them in the eye and let them know that you care about them, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, one of the challenges that we are facing in Bermuda today . . . and I am going to talk about the process that has got us to this point and why I am challenged, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, there are people in this country who, if the PLP does something . . . if the PLP puri fied water, if we ran Jesus Christ himself as a candi date, we would see no favour in their eyes, Mr. Speaker. But the same people, Mr. Speaker, when the One Bermuda Alliance repeatedly comes to the floor of this Parliament and by their words seem to believe that what they perceive us, as a Government at our worst, what they perceive at our worst, is the standard to which they should set themselves, Mr. Speaker. W e hear silence when the refrain repeatedly is, Well, you did it . Na-nana- na boo-boo, you did it, too. That is the standard to which this Government holds itself and its supporters hold them, Mr. Speaker . Because, Mr. Speaker, we know how our people show their displeasure. They stay home. Or as you well know, Mr. Speaker, they com e to Alaska Hall and they make off. Or they go to the [Royal] Gazette. But we express our dissatisfaction. But the supporters of the One Bermuda Alliance, Mr. Speaker, they whisper to us, I am not happy with this deal. And I say to them, Well, when you wer e not happy with us, we could not keep you off the front page of the paper. But then we do not play golf with you. We do not yacht with you. We do not suck wine with you . So you know there are people who are putting their personal relationships and their politics above the country. People who know better, Mr. Speaker . So when you have a gentleman like Mr. Craig Mayor step up and put his name on the line in oppos ition to what he recently claimed was his party — prepared and knowing how the One Bermuda Alliance is alleged to get down when you go against them, how they move heaven and earth to silence you, to put you back in your box, in your place, to keep you on the plantation, Mr. Speaker. Oh, no, Mr. Speaker, just i magine if the PLP Government had awarded a contract of this magnitude. Look, let us say we gave this con-tract to a Jamaican company shipping millions of dol-lars to Jamaica. How would the OBA react? How would their supporters have reacted? Mr. Speaker, if we had an e- mail leaked that said that our Minister of Finance had fuzzied up the numbers, how would the supporters of the One Ber-muda Alliance have acted? Let us be real. Let us have some real talk. If we came to the floor of this House and we spoke about this being a transparent deal but then an e- mail leaks and, Mr. Speaker, (if I may quote), An e- mail leaks from the Minister of Fuzziness to Laurie Mahon of CIBC saying, “I have fuzzied up the no new debt part of the view in view of the funding gap.” Right? But then you come back and say we need to stop using the word “transparency” as the company is not transparent in its contracting, Mr. Speaker . Just imagine if that e- mail exchange was leaked by a PLP Minister of Finance. Just imagine, Mr. Speaker .
Bermuda House of Assembly Yes, Mr. Speaker, we got some situational ethics in this country. We have some situational ethics and a prism through which people observe these i ssues because I challenged the Minister of Finance and his colleagues that if we had brought forward this deal and behaved in the manner in which they have behaved getting to this, if they would have not o pposed it. They would have opposed it with every fibre of their being, Mr. Speaker, because they would have been right. It is wrong, Mr. Speaker . It is wrong. Mr. Speaker, if we had a Minister of Finance on a deal say, No, this is not privatisation —people are saying it is privatisation but it is not. But then an e- mail leaks saying, and I quote, Mr. Speaker, from the Royal Gazette of [May] 15th, [2015], an e- mail from two members of CCC saying, “I received a call from Steve Nackan of Aecon . . . Inte nt is to privatise the airport operat ion.” Well, Mr. Speaker, if our Minister of Finance had said we are not privatising, but the business we are involved with and had been in bed with and c anoodling with says it is, the Royal Gazette would have been a- hopping. All the cyber Klansmen would have been out there with their anonymous names, talking about corruption, friends and family. And, you know, they probably would have found a way to get the Honourable former Member Dr. Ewart Brown in the mix, too. They would have been all worked up, Mr. Speaker . All their little nerds sitting up behind their computer hiding, hiding. Big cowards, Mr. Speaker . The cyber Klansmen. Imagine, Mr. Speaker, if this PLP, as Government, had taken the action to sue a critic the way the Honourable Minister of Finance sued Jason Ha yward of the BPSU. Imagine if we had decided, Y ou know what, we are going to sue the head of the Chamber of Commerce because we do not like what he said. What would the OBA and the cyber Klansmen and their supporters have said, Mr. Speaker ? What would they have said? Oh, we know what they would have said, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. If we gave $4 million to a law firm that was perceived as being friends and family, that in the opinion of many is friends and family, what would the supporters of the One Bermuda Alliance, what would the MPs of the One Bermuda Alliance, what would the executive, the PR team have said about us, Mr. Speaker ? What would they have said? My, my, my. Imagine if we brought a draft Code of Conduct of Procurement, but before we sign off on it we brought forward a deal that would have broken that draft Code of Conduct, Mr. Speaker . What would they have said about us? We know what they would have said. If a company that received a no- bid contract of this magnitude, had somebody involved with it that had a 27- year relationship with a Minister of the Government . . . what would they have said? Friends and family. We have the playbook. Corruption, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, I remember the Honourable former Premier when it came down to the GP car —the GP1 of the Premier when it was bought, and there was all this furore and whoop and holler about it. There was no whoop and holler when Sir John Swan, the Honourable former Member, had a car. There was no whoop or holler. And Dr. Brown said to me, You know what? It is not the car. In their eyes it is the monkey in the car . That is it. Because if you can see where it is wrong, if we did it and if you can have a Government that believes that the standard that they have to m eet is us, and what they perceive to be our worst, Mr. Speaker, we have a problem. And that is why the country is struggling, because there are people who know this is wrong. There are people who know this is better and who know that this deal is shady, Mr. Speaker . But, you know what? It is not the car. It is the monkey in the car, Mr. Speaker . Now, Mr. Speaker, imagine if we had locked supporters of the One Bermuda Alliance out of this Parliament and pepper sprayed them —little Heather from Ferry Reach, l ittle Molly from Paget —just ima gine, Mr. Speaker. And imagine if our leader could not say who he spoke to on what was one of the darkest days of our modern memory. What would they say, Mr. Speaker ? No, no, no. Mr. Speaker, we spent 27 months on this. Twen ty-seven months. We have had a Government that was prepared to endure Island- wide strikes, possible violence, surrounding of the Parliament. They were prepared to go through all that and, Mr. Speaker, where was that energy on educating our children? Where was that energy when the children at T. N. Tatem were at risk for mould? Where was that ener-gy? Now, the Honourable Premier’s office and the Cabinet, they found plenty of time and energy to get that place dealt with for mould. But when it came to our children, we are being mischievous. This goes back to a . . .Mr. Speaker, I just . . . I just . . . I do not even know what to say. When I look at the fact that the Honourable Member who just took his seat . . . perhaps his script did not include this, and he started referring to, well, you know, if the Oppos ition is serious about being the next Government then they would have talked about a Swiss challenge. Well, I hope that Honourable Member is ready to put his “X” in the right place next time because that is exactly what we did. You know, I will not criticise you. As Dame Lois used to say, What you do in the dark in that booth goes with you in the box . So I hope that Ho nourable Member will join with us as we bring forth the proposal that was tabled in March 2014, debated June 2014, would have included that. But when it is not in the script, you just cannot deviate from it; you cannot ad lib, Mr. Speaker . 592 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly My message is simple. Others have talked about the inadequacies of this plan. Others have talked about the lack of transparency in this plan. But as a country, Mr. Speaker, we need to now have some real talk. It simply is not right. If you see som ething that if we do it, it is wrong, but if they do it, it is okay, and the country has to look deep into its hear t as to why that is the case . . . why is that the case, Mr. Speaker ? We are about to make a bad decision. The Government has the numbers. As I said, the Opposition has a say, and we will have our say. We might go to 7:00 am today, but that is okay, be-cause when the book is written on this the people will know that while one side stood strong for Bermudians and fought for an airport that will be maintained by us and owned by us for 30 years, there was another group prepared to sell off the airport and send millions of dollars of revenue to Canada. Thank you, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member . The Chair will now recognise the Minister for Sport, Minister Sylvan Richards. You have the floor. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, it has been a long day.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: We are still going at it. This is what we were elected to do, and I was not g oing to speak on this matter because I think enough has been said over the last few months about this ai rport project. But I …
Yes. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: We are still going at it. This is what we were elected to do, and I was not g oing to speak on this matter because I think enough has been said over the last few months about this ai rport project. But I have to take to my feet and speak in this Honourable House and to the perhaps three people that are listening on the radio at this hour in the morning. Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot of talk t onight about the project, the financing, the tons of i nformation that have been passed forward to the O pposition, the lack of information that has been passed forward or not passed forward to the Opposition . . . we can go on and on and on and on. But, Mr. Speak-er, in my mind and in the minds of a lot of Bermudians this is not about the airport, per se. This is about an Opposition who kindly reminds me of the Opposition that Barack Obama faced when he was first elected to the United States Presidency, where he inherited an economy that was in freefall and he had goals and objectives that he wanted to achieve, and it was made very clear from his first day in office that he was going to be opposed on everything that he tried to do. And on every initiative that he tried to put into effect there was opposition. It was sustained. It never eased up and it continued from the day he was elected until eight years later when he gave up the presidency. Mr. Speaker, I speak from my heart. I speak from my reality. And my reality tells me that the Opposition opposed this airport deal because it is an OBA plan. The Opposition opposed this airport deal be-cause they had a plan that cost far more than the ai rport that we are going to build and they were unable to come up with the financing to make it a reality. So millions of dollars were spent doing feasibility studies and then that plan went on a shelf where it sat catc hing dust. So this is something that Bermuda needs, and we, the OBA, are going to build this airport and we have had to face constant opposition. For me it is not about the airport. The goa lposts have been constantly changed. We could give them every single bit of information that they say that they want, and they will come up with a reason to o ppose and to continue to oppose the building of this airport, Mr. Speaker, because the Opposition are not being honest brokers in this regard. They are simply not. They talk about polling and they talk about people in Bermuda do not support this . Well, I have seen the polls change in our favour. And Dece mber 2 nd was a terrible day, Mr. Speaker, a terrible day. And, for clarity , I was in this House with you, Mr. Speaker, on that day. And I went out on that balcony and I watched a crowd surround this place. And the Opposition are masters at manipulating and for or-chestrating drama. I saw Opposition MPs in that crowd. And I am going to tell you . . . I saw the riots of 1977. I was right in the thick of it. I have seen this be-fore. I have been to this rodeo and, Mr. Speaker, what I saw on December 2 nd brought tears to my eyes. It truly did because it showed me that there is a lot of healing that needs to occur in our country. There is still a lot of hurt —especially with the older generation. I saw it on December 2 nd. I am not going to cast blame on who should have done this or who should not have done what, but we have a lot of work to do. But I will tell you this, Mr. Speaker, I want to formally thank the Leader of the Opposition from constituency 18 who had a public meeting earlier this week to discuss this whole airport deal. When he was asked about protesting today, he stood his ground and said you can protest but you have to protest peacefully and abide by the law. There were people in that audience who were disappointed with what the Opposition Leader had to say and they questioned his leadership. The Shadow Attorney General from constit uency 36, who is a lawyer, a Learned Member, when he was asked by the audience members, If we block the entrance to Parliament are we breaking the law ? He said, Yes, you are breaking the law. You cannot block the entrance to Parliament . And there was silence in that room because there were a lot of people there who were not hearing what they wanted to hear.
Bermuda House of Assembly So, I commend the Opposition Leader and the Shadow Attorney General for their stance at that meeting. I will tell you why. Because today, based on comments by the Leader of the Bermuda Industrial Union who last night tried to rally support to come to this place this morning to do whatever they wanted to do, it did not happen. It did not happen because bad things happen when good people do nothing. So as far as I am concerned, those people who tried to m anipulate our people took an “L” today —a big loss — and they do not want to talk about that. But they t ook an “L” today. I am going to go back to December 2 nd. People said they were protesting peacefully. Well, when they block the entrance to Parliament and you prevent duly-elected Members of this House from entering this place to do the peoples’ business, you are breaking the law. Now, the Opposition has tried to make a big brouhaha about why we came in to work early. I make no apologies. As they say, I take back no check because— [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Sy lvan D. Richards, Jr.: I am talking about coming here early, Mr. Speaker, because I learned from the past. I learn from my mistakes. When I make them I learn from them. And there was going to be no repeat today of what happened December 2 nd. Okay? Strategy. Outwit. Outplay. Outlast. It is almost like a game of Survivor here. We are survivors. I am a survivor, okay, Mr. Speaker . So, all this talk about sneaking around and running away from people and hiding under the cover of darkness . . . well, I tell you what, Mr. Speaker, I got up at four o’clock this morning. I drove in, I parked my car across town, and I walked to this place, and there were no protestors around. Nobody. And I walked in this place, and then my parliamentary colleagues walked in this place and we were prepared for today. And my prayers were answered, Mr. Speaker, because I prayed. I prayed that there would be peace today. I prayed that cooler heads would prevail. I prayed that there would be a spirit of oneness and togetherness and not division, Mr. Speaker, because there are people in this place who thrive off of division. Divide and conquer; pitting Bermudians against one another. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Calling a spade like a spade, Mr. Speaker . Manipulating the people to achieve their political ends. Now, Mr. Speaker, I heard the Member from constituency 33, who I had the pleasure of sitting on the Boundaries Commission with, and with the Ho n-ourable Member, the Shadow Attorney General. Very harmonious meetings. We put aside our political part isanship and did a job that the Constitution said we had to do. I got to know these men on a deeper level. But, Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed with what I heard from the Member from constituency 33, using terms like “cyber Klansmen.” I get it. It is code word. It is meant to stir up emotions. It is meant to divide and conquer —using terms like “monkey in the car.” We do not have to use that type of terminology, Mr. Speaker . We need to rise above; elevate. And it breaks my heart bec ause we are all Bermudians in this place. We all want what is best for Bermuda in this place. I see my colleagues working hard every day to keep Bermuda on track. You see, there is a lot going on in the world right now. We have Brexit in the UK. We have threats that are going to be coming from the US. [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, we need people —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Mem bers, l et us . . . you have had your opportunity to speak and the width has been wide. [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSo appreciate that. [Inaudibl e interjections and laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Absolutely. It is a big pitch. Carry on, Member. Hon. Sylv an D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . I kind of lost my train of thought — The Speake r: Sorry about that. Sorry about that. Hon. Sy lvan D. Richards, Jr.: Cup Match— [Inaudible interjections]
An Hon.
Member An Hon.
MemberYou only have 20 minutes. Hon. Sy lvan D. Richards, Jr.: Yes, yes, yes. Bermuda is facing a lot of serious challenges and all this stuff that we are doing, pitting ourselves against each other, is weakening us. There is some serious stuff going on that could change everything for …
You only have 20 minutes. Hon. Sy lvan D. Richards, Jr.: Yes, yes, yes. Bermuda is facing a lot of serious challenges and all this stuff that we are doing, pitting ourselves against each other, is weakening us. There is some serious stuff going on that could change everything for Bermudians. So when I see all this political posturing and coded language . . . you know, we all need to be rowing together because our very way of life is under threat. So, I want people to understand that, and my team are out there trying to mitigate the threats from without, and then we have to deal with the threats from within. 594 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly So, Mr. Speaker, it is late. I am tired. But I want this Honourable House and the people listening to know that as a Government we are going to do what we need to do to get the job done. Nobody said it was going to be easy, and I am going to talk about an experience I had this morning, or yesterday mor ning . . . I cannot even remember, I am so blurry right now. [Laughter] Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: But I was coming out of my house, getting ready to go to work, a gentleman rode up on his bike. I have never seen the guy before. An older, black gentleman. He stopped in front of me . . . and now when people stop and talk to me, I do not know what to expect. Either they are going to blast me or they are going to give me love and encouragement. So I just took a deep breath and he looked me in the eyes and said, Look, man. You have to get back in the House. We need you in the House. He said, I am one of those people who had my dreams all wrapped up in an ex -PLP Premier who made a lot of promises about black empowerment . He had his fists up in the air and gave all the contracts to people that do not look l ike me.
[Inaudible interjections]
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberB lackity-black, blacki ty, blackity . Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, and he gave me a word. He said, You get back in the House. You do what you need to do to get back in the House because we need people like you speaking up. See, Mr. …
B lackity-black, blacki ty, blackity . Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Mr. Speaker, and he gave me a word. He said, You get back in the House. You do what you need to do to get back in the House because we need people like you speaking up. See, Mr. Speaker, when you speak up som etimes people do not like it. And I tell people the truth is an offence but not a sin. So, w e are going to pass this Bill. We are going to build an airport. Five years from now nobody is going to even remember all of this nonsense that has been going on about this airport. They are going to fly into Bermuda or fly out of Bermuda and they are going to be so proud that they are going to have a modern, world- class airport because things are on the upswing in Bermuda, Mr. Speaker , regardless of what the Opposition might try to say. I see it all around me. New hotels, sporting events —there is renewed interest in Bermuda as a destination, as a place to do business. It is not by ac-cident, Mr. Speaker, it is not by accident because since 2012 we have been doing a lot of hard work, a lot of blood, sweat, and tears against everything that the Opposition has thrown at us. Because call it a spade, if we are successful, they do not get re-elected. That is politics. I get it. But it comes to a point where we start to eat our own and that is my fear that as we get closer and closer to an election and the desperat ion sets in, we need to step back and look within and let us do the right thing for the people of Bermuda. I am appealing to my counterparts across the floor. Do the right thing. Thank you, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member . The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 35, MP D. P. Lister. You have the floor. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, you know, I have had a practise of late that as we get late into …
Thank you, Honourable Member . The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 35, MP D. P. Lister. You have the floor. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, you know, I have had a practise of late that as we get late into debates and particularly at this hour of the morning I normally do not speak. You know that has been a practise of late, Mr. Speaker. But, Mr. Speaker, I rise to my feet now mainly because of comments that are made by two of the latest speakers on the Government side. Firstly, th e Member from constituency 25, Mr. Pettingill, when he was on his feet, Mr. Speaker, he made comments (and I am paraphrasing) but he made comments bas ically to the extent that he did not canvass in the last election to build an airport. He said he did not go up and down Spring Hill, Warwick to get people to vote for him so they can build an airport. And he went on and made his points about his issues that he had with where we are today. Mr. Speaker, his comments lead me actually to the speaker who just sat down, Mr. Richards. I ca nnot remember what constituency, Mr. Richards —17?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSeven. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: [Constituency] 7, rather. Mr. Speaker, it takes me back to Dece mber 2 nd. Much has been said already about December 2nd. Mr. Speaker, you and the Member from constituency 7 were the two Members in the House that day when the rest of us …
Seven. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: [Constituency] 7, rather. Mr. Speaker, it takes me back to Dece mber 2 nd. Much has been said already about December 2nd. Mr. Speaker, you and the Member from constituency 7 were the two Members in the House that day when the rest of us were outside of the House because of the protest that took place. But, Mr. Speaker, you know, during the course of the day I came in. I came in and chatted with you for a while. During that same time I actually chatted with the Member from constituency 7, Mr. Richards. I was hoping today when he rose on his feet just now he would reflect on some of that convers ation. He did say he speaks from his heart, Mr. Speaker. He speaks from his heart; he was very passionate just now patting on his chest how he speaks from his heart. So I am going to take him to heart, Mr. Speak-er, that he does speak from his heart and reflect on the conversation that he had with me on December 2 nd. The conversation basically, Mr. Speaker —and I also understand why he came in early this morning because of the experience he had on December 2nd. I understand why he came in early because I think that day actually touched his heart in a way that it probably
Bermuda House of Assembly had not been pricked in a long time. But that day, when we were having that conversation, Mr. Speaker, the conversation centred around the fact that Mr. Richards was saying he was terribly disturbed by the actions of his Government that rose the people to the point that they were prepared to block Parliament. They were prepared to stand out there and protest against the actions of his Government. And the conversation went on from there, Mr. Speaker, to where the Member said that the best thing for his Government, the support that he would encourage his Government or the support that he would give to his Premier would be that this is a matter that we need to take back to the people and get a mandate to do it because it was not par t of our mandate when we won the Government. Am I correct, Mr. Richards? He is nodding his head that I am correct. That was the gist of this conversation. We were not mandated to do this. We should not be here riling up the people of Bermuda in the manner that they are being riled up outside in the streets today blocking us from this place. It is wrong for my Government to be doing this. These were his words. If we this dead set against doing this, we should go back to the polls and get the mandate of the people to do this . And he was correct. He was correct, Mr. Speaker, and we had a very level -headed convers ation on that. I expressed my view; he expressed his view. But I agreed with him, Mr. Speaker, just like Mr. Pettingill when he was on his feet —said basically the same thing. Same thing! That Government did not have the mandate to go down this road. Our people riled up, Mr. Speaker, in the streets over it, up and down this country, all ages, black, white —yes, black and white—not just black as people were trying to paint it, but black and white. They were riled up over this, Mr. Speaker. [People] of all ages, Mr. Speaker. And yes, the senior members . . . the senior members, Mr. Speaker, were the ones who touched me the most on that day. B ecause most of that crowd out there were senior me mbers who would have memory. It took them back, Mr. Speaker, to a time that they thought they would not have to see again in this country. That is how they were affected by what was going on at that time, Mr. Speaker . Senior members, Mr. Speaker, who came out to stand up on a matter that they had done years before that they did not ex-pect to have to do again. Mr. Speaker, they are senior members. They are senior members. Those senior members got pepper sprayed, Mr. Speaker, pepper sprayed. Mr. Speaker, another Member on his feet, I think it was Mr. Richards when he was on his feet, referred to the riots. Yes, we can remember, those of us who were around in that era. Some of those in this House are too young for that. But those of us who were around can remember the riots of 1977. Almost 40 years to the anniversary of December 2 nd when pepper spraying took place. Mr. Speaker, when the riot squads were called out in 1977, they were called out because there was a riot. There was a riot and they had every right to be called out because there was a riot. December 2 nd by nobody’s measuring stick was a riot. By nobody’s measuring stick. Those people did not deserve . . . the people of Bermuda did not deserve to have a riot squad called out on peaceful protestors. And they were peaceful until the riot squad came. Peaceful until the riot squad came. The tension rose when the riot squad came. The Member and I agreed on that when we talked about it here in this House on December 2 nd. We agreed on that. Mr. Speaker, much has been said about that this morning. And last Friday, Mr. Speaker, we had questions to the Premier in his role (my words) in the exchange of conversation or communication, the knowledge that he knew of what was taking place on that day. We finally got answers today, Mr. Speaker, of those series of phone calls. I was disturbed by the answers, Mr. Speaker . I was disturbed for this reason. There were six phone calls, I believe, that the Premier said he made with the police on December 2 nd. The last two calls were di sturbing, Mr. Speaker, because the second to last call was that at 1:12 or 1:13 (if my memory serves me cor-rect) in the afternoon. The pepper spraying i ncident happened 45 minutes later at about two o’clock in the afternoon. After the pepper spraying happened, after our senior citizens had been pepper sprayed by a riot squad that had no business being out there, the Premier did not make further contact wi th the police until almost six o’clock in the afternoon. Indeed. Mr. Speaker, if the Premier was concerned about those citizens that call would have taken place instantly after it happened. Instantly! Mr. Speaker, when I walked from this gate down to that gate and saw senior people wiping pe pper spray off their face, do you know where I went? Straight to the Police Commissioner. I went straight to the Police Commissioner and told him he was out of line. Myself and the Shadow Attorney General — straight to the police station. That had gone far too far and he had to know he had gone far too far. But I am just a Member of the Opposition. The Premier did not see that he had a role to play to let the Commissioner know because he has been saying every time he was questioned this week and last week that the command of what happens falls onto the Commissioner. He is the Premier! He is supposed to let the Commissioner know he had gone too far. But no, he did not call him until six hours later. Six hours later. Six hours later. How are we supposed to feel that he has concern about the people in the street? Based on that action, how are the grandmot hers and grandfathers that were sprayed with pepper 596 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly spray supposed to feel that the Premier had concern for them when it took six hours for him to reach out to the Police Commissioner after they had been pepper sprayed? That is just disgraceful, Mr. Speaker, in my opinion. Disgraceful. Disgraceful. Mr. Speaker, a lot of emotions have come up out of this —December 2 nd and leading up to today —a lot of emotions long before December 2nd, Mr. Speaker. And based on that, it is a clear indication of how this country really feels about the process that has been taken to get us here, Mr. Speaker. It is a process that has caused the issue . . . the Member from . . . Minister Cole when he was on his feet just now was trying to make reference to processes that could have been done and should have been done in a sense. In his own presentation he was contradicting what has been done. Meaning, that document that had been signed does not allow for the type of processes that he was trying to say should have been done. The document his Government has signed, Mr. Speaker . His own document, he was contradicting just by sa ying this should have been done or that should have been done. The document does not allow for that type of process, Mr. Speaker . It does not allow for it. So, Minister, if you are that concerned in that regard, you should not be supporting this because—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member , Honourable Member , you speak — Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I should be addressing—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIf the Minister does not — Hon. Dennis P. Lister: If the Minister —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: If the Minister, yes, tha nk you, Mr. Speaker . If the Minister is able to put that view forward then, actually, he is presenting the fact that he is uncomfortable with the process and, Mr. Speaker, he should not support it. But he is …
Yes. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: If the Minister, yes, tha nk you, Mr. Speaker . If the Minister is able to put that view forward then, actually, he is presenting the fact that he is uncomfortable with the process and, Mr. Speaker, he should not support it. But he is going to try to do a point of order, but that is all right. That is all right. That is all right.
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Mr. Speaker , the Honourable Member is misleading the House.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSorry? Just a minute, Honourable Member . Take your time. Do you have a point of order? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Yes, the [Member] is misleading the House. Mr. Speaker, as he said, the agreement may have said that the Government is not allowed to …
Sorry? Just a minute, Honourable Member . Take your time. Do you have a point of order?
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Yes, the [Member] is misleading the House. Mr. Speaker, as he said, the agreement may have said that the Government is not allowed to have a Swiss challenge. But the Opposition can.
[Inaudible interjections] Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Mr. Speaker , I am going to ignore that. I am just going to ignore it, Mr. Speaker, I am just going to ignore it. I think the best thing for me is to ignore it. Mr. Speaker, the point to be made here is that we cannot ignore the concerns of the people on the street in this country. The people have expressed, Mr. Speaker, continually, their concern about the process of where we are going on this thing. Mr. Speaker, I never, never, never expected in my time up here to see people in the streets as they were. Mr. Speaker, I knew I would never see people pepper sprayed for a peaceful protest. Mr. Speaker, if that had been a riot, the riot squad would have had my blessing to be out because it would deserve for them to be out. But there was not a riot, Mr. Speaker . It was not a riot. Let us be clear on that. We have had conversation today about lessons learned. The lesson learned out of that, Mr. Speaker, is that I hope, I hope, we will never see that happen again. Never see it happen again. People had a right to protest, Mr. Speaker . If it is a riot, it is a riot, and the riot squad comes out. But not against protests, Mr. Speaker . The lesson learned from here, Mr. Speaker, goes back to the conversation that the Minister Ric hards and I had on Dec ember 2 nd was that the peoples’ voice has to count. The voice of the people counts, Mr. Speaker, and the voice of the people has spoken loudly, continually on this matter. Continually, Mr. Speaker . Who has suffered through that? It is the same people, Mr. Speaker, who had the riot squad turned on them —who have had no response from that side of the House. And I say it like that, Mr. Speaker, in that no one, other than I believe, Ms. Scott, who right afterwards in her comments publicly expressed concern and dismay at how she saw people being treated . . . I have not heard that from the rest of the Government, Mr. Speaker, at all. No one of the Government has stood up and expressed their concern of senior cit izens, Mr. Speaker, being pepper sprayed. Citizens being treated the way they were treated on that particular day. Mr. Speaker, that is the Government. No one in this Government has come out. The Premier has not taken the lead on that which I think he should have, Mr. Speaker . But it has been clear by actions where they stand and how they feel about the people of this country. Now, Mr. S pe aker, my notes were really going to be on the whole matter that was before us —
Bermuda House of Assembly The Speaker: Finish up talking about the airport —
Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Well, Mr. Speaker, you did say that you were allowing a wide berth for the bow ling today. You gave us a real wide berth!
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, right. Right, I did not want you to get off the field! Hon. Dennis P. Lister: I am taking full advantage of it, Mr. Speaker, I know that. I took full advantage of it but I think it was required at that time. But because my time is short, …
Yes, right. Right, I did not want you to get off the field! Hon. Dennis P. Lister: I am taking full advantage of it, Mr. Speaker, I know that. I took full advantage of it but I think it was required at that time. But because my time is short, as I only have 20 minutes on this matter, I probably have about eight minutes or so left, five minutes or so left —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerSix. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Six minutes. See that? I am not going to bother to go down where I was originally going to go in the notes that I have prepared, Mr. Speaker . But other than this fact that I think it was i mportant to express that, …
Six. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Six minutes. See that? I am not going to bother to go down where I was originally going to go in the notes that I have prepared, Mr. Speaker . But other than this fact that I think it was i mportant to express that, to express it, because the Minister from constituency 7, he and I had a real heart -to-heart conversation that day. I was hoping that that message he would have been able to take and [transmit] to his own members, to his Cabinet, Mr. Speaker . I think that message has been lost from D ecember 2 ndand today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker .
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAny other Honourable Member care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 24, MP Lawrence Scott. You have the floor.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottThank you, Mr. Speaker . As you know, this is a subject that I am very passionate about. I have been sitting here like sort of chomping at the bit, but been interested and very quietly listening to what all Members have had to say. I just want to start …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker . As you know, this is a subject that I am very passionate about. I have been sitting here like sort of chomping at the bit, but been interested and very quietly listening to what all Members have had to say. I just want to start back by going to when I joined the Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Incorporated, there was a gentleman that helped me with the application pr ocess named Johnathan Ball. He is the president of PHC and he taught me: I, me, my, mine. These are words that do not rhyme. Us, we, ours, together, these are words that last forever . Mr. Speaker, that is basically saying that tal king about I, I, I is not appropriate for most situations. But there are a few I’s that I would like to talk about when talking about the Airport Authority. The first I is about an Interest. Is the Airport Authority something that the Bermuda public is interested in? And I would say yes. Then the thing is that if the public is interested in what do we as legislators, what do we as leaders need to give them? We need to give them information, Mr. Speaker. And that information needs to be solid. That information needs to be seen to have integrity, Mr. Speaker. It cannot be information that is shrouded in controversy. It cannot be information that seems to come from backroom deals. It cannot be information that is a part of rumours. And, Mr. Speaker, if that i nformation lacks the integrity, the people of this country will cry for an investigation. So, Mr. Speaker, with that said and with that premise, on March 2014 I tabled a motion in this House that outlined how we could responsibly and effectively redevelop the Bermuda International Ai rport. It would be a way that took it off the balance sheet, a we-are-off-balance- sheet scenario. It would allow us to keep and maintain control of both the airport (the facility), the operation and, most importantly, keep control of the financial side of things, Mr. Speak-er, and it was something that would now, seeing the OBA’s model, come in or save the country much more money than the OBA’s model as it is now. What is scary, Mr. Speaker, is that there have been Ministers, Members on the other side, that have had (quote/unquote) “tried to challenge the PLP” to come up with a model of our own. We came up with a model, Mr. Speaker. The first time that this country heard anything about an Airport Authority was the night I introduced it, Mr. Speaker , back in 2014. And that was before the Minister . . . and, Mr. Speaker, when looking through the Hansard you would see that almost every Member on that side said that my idea was a good idea. There was only one person, only one individual that said that it was not a good idea and they said, and I quote, “Oh, it sounds like something that he read out of a book somewhere, Mr. Speaker .”
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWho said that?
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottThat was the Honourable Minister of Finance that said that, Mr. Speaker . He was the only one that was not interested. But if you look at the PATI information, Mr. Speaker . . . I understand now, Mr. Speaker . It makes sense. All the lines, all the dots …
That was the Honourable Minister of Finance that said that, Mr. Speaker . He was the only one that was not interested. But if you look at the PATI information, Mr. Speaker . . . I understand now, Mr. Speaker . It makes sense. All the lines, all the dots connect because, Mr. Speaker, in June of 2014 the Minister had already started speaking to Aecon. Aecon had already started whispering in his ear, Mr. Speaker. So the thing is that the Honourable Minister on the other side, Cole S imons, is saying that the PLP needs to come up with a plan when we are going to vote on something that the OBA did not come up with. So the OBA themselves have not come up with a plan to redevelop the airport. Aecon did, Mr. Speaker . Members on the other side want to talk about masters of manipulation, Mr. Speaker. I am of good information, very good information, that Aecon are masters of manipulation. Masters of manipulation of not just this situation, but of parliaments and sitting MPs. I am of good information of that, Mr. Speaker . So the Honourable Members on the other side need 598 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly to be careful what they say, careful what they ask for and because their words . . . Mr. Speaker, my father always says that language is the fingerprint of our emotion. The fingerprints that they have left all over this debate show that they have not read the information. They have not read those 600 pages. How do I know they have not read the 600 pages? Because maybe I have a bit too much time, or maybe I love aviation too much, but I have counted each and every one of them. It is 603 pages, Mr. Speaker, so when the Minister says it is thousands of pages, he has not read the information either, Mr. Speaker . But I digress. When it goes to the Airport Authority, Mr. Speaker, the model that I proposed, Mr. Speaker . . . and do you know what? I will take it out of the context of saying I, but the model that the PLP is proposing, Mr. Speaker, is one that works. It is one that is tried, true, and tested, Mr. Speaker . How do I know, Mr. Speaker? Because it is the same model that the Bahamas used to develop theirs. They had the Airport Authority. And the Air port Authority had a contractor, and it happened to be a Canadian contractor at that, Mr. Speaker. And they were able to pay it off without having to give away the operation or the financial control, Mr. Speaker . When it comes to this Airport Authority, Mr. Speaker, when I did the . . . no, when the PLP pr esented the plan for the airport redevelopment, we i ncluded the Causeway, Mr. Speaker. We included the Causeway, and we were able to include the Caus eway because there had already been a feasibility study done by HSBC. I am very interested as to why the Minister did not know —and if he did know, did not mention—that HSBC had offered to pay for the rede-velopment of the Causeway, if all options had been looked at. So, Mr. Speaker, that is somebody who is already here in Bermuda that wants to help with the i nfrastructure project and is willing to fund it. But, yet, the Aecon deal is supposed to be the best deal for us, Mr. Speaker . It is ironic that the Honourable Minister of F inance was against an Airport Authority deal but then when he heard it from Aecon all of a sudden it is a good deal, Mr. Speaker. Is that one of those where just because I am Bermudian I do not know what I am talking about, Mr. Speaker ? One thing that I have also heard here from almost every person that has spoken on this has said, Oh, they said this about the airport. Those experts in aviation said that. Oh, or, the Bermudians that work at the airport , Mr. Speaker, my tenure at the airport goes back into the late 1990s. How many Members in this Chamber could say the same thing? Mr. Speaker, I have worked there for extended periods of time. I know the ins and outs better than anyone up here in this Chamber, Mr. Speaker —former Ministers included. Mr. Speaker, I sat in the last time (in 1998) Aecon came down to try to get the privatisation of the airport done. And it was during my first summer there in 1995 when Aecon was there again trying to do it for the UBP Government, who turned it down, Mr. Speaker . But, yet, this is supposed to be the best deal for the country. Mr. Speaker, this deal has been passed around. This deal is the deal that was set up in Ecua-dor—Quito, Ecuador, Mr. Speaker. And what ha ppened with Aecon’s development in Quito, Ecuador? It was found unconstitutional by an Ecuadorian Su-preme Court. What was unconstitutional about it? The payment schedules, Mr. Speaker, the way that the funds came out. So they had to renegotiate the deal, Mr. Speaker, and then they went and took that deal and they shopped it to the Cayman Islands, Mr. Speaker . What happened in the Cayman Islands? They said that it did not have value for money. The UK Government said it did not have value for money, Mr. Speaker. And what did they do? They came to Bermuda to try to shop it here and . . . do you know what? The Honourable Minister picked up on it and he said this is a good deal. How do we know that it is the same deal that was down in the Cayman Islands? Because the origi-nal contract said that the Causeway, which we all know, and is in Hansard, was included for the $200 million before the price tag went up to $441 million, which it is now not including a cargo facility. But going back to the Causeway, the Causeway connected Blue Hole Hill with the [Owen] Roberts Airport. Where is the [Owen] Roberts Airport, Mr. Speaker ? That is in the Cayman Islands! That is a very long bridge, Mr. Speaker ! Therefore, this is why I am saying we are going back to really having an Airport Authority and the importance of an Airport Authority. The Airport Author-ity is supposed to be the check and balance, Mr. Speaker . The Airport Authority is supposed to be i ndependent of that of the contractor. That does not happen in this situation. How do we know? Because I read those 603 pages. In those 603 pages, Mr. Speaker, what does it say? Already now, it says that as long as it is part of the commercial model . . . that if it is part of the commercial model and Aecon propos-es it, that the Airport Authority has to . . . they have to go along with it. Therefore, there is no independence, Mr. Speaker . If they are already being committed to doing stuff that they do not want to do . . . and an Airport Authority has not been created yet, Mr. Speaker . How else do I know that it is not independent? Because if you read through there, Skyport are the ones doing the employment contracts for the Airport Authority employees. Skyport, the Honourable Minister has said is a Canadian- owned company. It is a company that has been created by Aecon, Mr. Speaker .
Bermuda House of Assembly So, Mr. Speaker, you are here to keep me in line. You agree with that?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNo, yo u keep yourself in line. I do not keep you in line.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottThat is the premise that the Honourable Finance Minister wants to get us in with this Airport Authority. Mr. Speaker, this is only an Airport Authority by name—not by deed, not by principle, and not by actions. So, Mr. Speaker, on the other side of this House, the Honourable Members, …
That is the premise that the Honourable Finance Minister wants to get us in with this Airport Authority. Mr. Speaker, this is only an Airport Authority by name—not by deed, not by principle, and not by actions. So, Mr. Speaker, on the other side of this House, the Honourable Members, the OBA, have been asking the PLP to do something that they will not do and then criticise us for doing stuff that they cannot do. That makes no sense, Mr. Speaker . But when I say that makes no sense, I remember that a good friend of mine always told me that common s ense was a pronoun and not an adjective. Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Minister (and I will use his pages and his numbering) says that he has given us 1,000 pages of information, Mr. Speaker . And that is all wonderful. We had 2,000 pages of PATI information that showed that he misrepresented the facts to the country. We have had 2,000 pages repr esenting that Aecon has misrepresented the facts, Mr. Speaker . But, yet, no one refers to those facts, and the thing is that out of the 1,000 pages we are still missing the key information. The fact is that if there is something we cannot see, it is not a good deal! Mr. Speaker, I do not know . . . I know that you are young at heart, Mr. Speaker, but—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI am young. What are you talking about? [Laughter]
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberHe went off the rails! [Laughter]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottI had an issue with one of my ace girls. Well, I guess she is a former ex -girlfriend of mine now. But it was because I would not let her see my phone. She said, Well, you have to be hiding something from me if you don’t want me …
I had an issue with one of my ace girls. Well, I guess she is a former ex -girlfriend of mine now. But it was because I would not let her see my phone. She said, Well, you have to be hiding something from me if you don’t want me to see your phone. If you aren’t doing nothing . . . you should not mind me seeing your phone. You know? But it is be-cause my phone rings at some odd hours . . . but I am an MP, Mr. Speaker, I have to serve my constituency and the constituency does not rest, so neither do I.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThat is a good line. [Laughter and inaudible interjections ]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottAnd the Whip calls me as well. But, Mr. Speaker, her premise . . . she was not right about me because I do not have anything to hide. I am a good guy. I am single for those that are listening out there, but — [Laughter]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottBut, Mr. Speaker, the premise is still the same. If this is a deal that the Gover nment is doing, and the Government is supposed to be doing the bidding of the people, and somebody tells you that the Government cannot see it or the Gov-ernment is not going to …
But, Mr. Speaker, the premise is still the same. If this is a deal that the Gover nment is doing, and the Government is supposed to be doing the bidding of the people, and somebody tells you that the Government cannot see it or the Gov-ernment is not going to show the people what is really going on, there is a problem, Mr. Speaker . And do you know what i s interesting? And maybe this is where the problem lies, because of all the consultants that the Honourable Minister has spo-ken about —CIBC, Aecon, CCC, Blue Ribbon Panel . . . Mr. Speaker, I have spoken to each and every one of them. And one thing that I found to be a common thread throughout this whole thing with the consul tants was that they said that they were only allowed, or only given instructions, or only had the remit to look at that one model. This one model that the Minister wants us to vote on today. I probed them on that and they said, No, they did not look at any other models. The only individual, the only people, the only group that said anything ot her than that was Aecon. And Aecon said that no, there are other models out there. And Aecon was very di plomatic in the way that they said that. You know what? They did not come right out and say that no, this . . . they did not say that this is the best model for Berm uda. But they did not say that . . . the way they worded it and the way I interpreted it was that this is not the best model out there for Bermuda but it is the best model that suits Aecon, Mr. Speaker . Then when I spoke to CIBC they said the same thing: This is the only model that they looked at. This is the only model they were given numbers for and I know it has been said time and time again, but, I shudder. And it left me feeling uneasy with the fact 600 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly that the consultant led off that three- hour meeting that the Minister said he set up by saying that, Oh, Minister Richards is an old friend of mine of 27 years . That is nice that you two are friends, but if you lead a meeting like that and you are talking to opposite . . . that, to me, says something. That sets off bells and whistles. Because also, like my colleagues have said, what if that happened under former Premier Jennifer Smith’s administration, former Premier Alex Scott’s administration, former Premier Ewart Brown’s admi nistration, former Leader of the Opposition Marc Bean, or if that happened under David Burt’s administration? They would be crying foul, Mr. Speaker. And then when I talked to the Blue Ribbon Panel, Mr. Speaker, I asked them —for all the acc olades that people have given them, there is one thing that people fail to realise, they have no aviation exp erience whatsoever. And we are talking about an Ai rport Authority and an airport redevelopment. So I asked them a question, How can you earnestly assess this or audit this without having any aviation ex-perience? And they said, Well, we just go by the reput ation of the contractor. I said, Oh, that is funny. Did you know about the Supreme Court ruling? No? Okay. Well, did you know about the issues with the United Nations and the payment structure that is going on right now? No? So, if you are doing it by their reputation and you do not know these things that are significant flaws of their reputation, then how robust of an evaluation can you be doing? And, then, it was even more disheartening was to find out that it was mentioned that, Oh, well, we have already written our report. We cannot include this into it. So nothing that we spoke about really made a difference. Which made me wonder how many of the other consultants are in this position al-ready? So is everything that is being put forth . . . I am trying to say, Is the Blue Ribbon Panel really a farce, Mr. Speaker, just to say that we put a supposed independent panel together? Is CIBC really trying to talk to us and answer our questions or are they trying to sell us on the position of the Government, Mr. Speaker ? Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the United N ations, which I touched on, and International Civil Avi ation Organisation (ICAO) and document 1982, this is where the issue comes in—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou just have a minute left.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottOh my gracious, t hat went fast. But, Mr. Speaker, in my last minute what I will say is this: This does not have . . . the Minister says that he abides by the rules of the market. He needs to either abide by the rules of the House …
Oh my gracious, t hat went fast. But, Mr. Speaker, in my last minute what I will say is this: This does not have . . . the Minister says that he abides by the rules of the market. He needs to either abide by the rules of the House or the rules of the air because this is what will either make or break this deal because the UN can come in and force them to renegotiate which could cause this project to go belly-up or crash land before it even takes off.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member . The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Premier. Premier, you have the floor. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley : Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Interesting analogy to end by the Honourable Member , which I think is just a little bit out there in the stratosphere somewhere. …
Thank you, Honourable Member . The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Premier. Premier, you have the floor. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley : Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Interesting analogy to end by the Honourable Member , which I think is just a little bit out there in the stratosphere somewhere. Mr. Speaker, let me start by just dealing with a couple of points by Honourable Members. And I have enjoyed this debate this afternoon, this evening and, well, last afternoon, last evening and this morning, Mr. Speaker . A number of colleagues on both sides of the floor have stuck to the issue at hand and some have strayed all over the place but such is a debate. Before I get into the main body of the context that I wanted to say, Mr. Speaker, one Honourable Member from that side, I think it was the Honourable Member from cons tituency 35 questioned the time it took to finally get answers. Let me just clarify a little bit, Mr. Speaker, because sometimes you have to r epeat yourself just a few times in politics. It took me the week to get answers simply because, Mr. Speaker, when I was asked the questions I had to get my phone records. When I got my phone records, I was off the Island for some surgery and I had to go look at every single number and punch it in to see who was actually called —because when you get your phone records, Mr. Speaker, they just list the number: 717- 0926 whatever. You have to figure out what it is. In the days of programming a number into your phone, there is probably only one number I know, three numbers that I know off the top of my head. My home phone number, my cell phone number and sometimes I can remember my wife’s phone number. But they are all plugged in by name. And so you have to go back and look at it. The last thing I wanted to do was come to this Honourable Chamber and try to answer questions without knowing exactly who all of those numbers applied to. So when I heard a week ago Friday, when I heard colleagues on the other side starting to rum inate about who I might have called, I was pretty sure that I never spoke to that person. But I did not want to commit until I saw those numbers, because if I did speak inadvertently out of trying to provide the an-swers as soon as possible they would have held me to account for that. They would have held me to account, so I took that time, Mr. Speaker, and I came back and I gave those six numbers to the Police Commissioner. One thing the Honourable Member probably forgot from a week ago was that, yes, I did call the
Bermuda House of Assembly Commissioner at 5:55. But what I said today, it was a follow up to a meeting that we had at t hree o’clock. So, right after the situation had calmed down, I called the Acting Governor. I said, Acting Governor, a few of my colleagues and I would like to come up and have a meeting with you, the Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner as soon as poss ible. I believe we met at three o’clock. So for the Honourable Member to say he rushed over to the police station and started to get answers, I called Government House and I went up there and discussed the matter. Now, Mr. Speaker, he also said that no on e from this side has stood up. He mentioned my honourable colleague, MP Scott. I am aware of a couple more colleagues who spoke out against it. Mr. Speak-er, I have spoken on this matter on December 2 nd at least two times publicly. Two times publicly. No one likes, for the record again, no one likes what hap-pened on that day. It left scars on all of us, Mr. Speaker . But we should stop trying to play political games that one side is holier -than- thou on this issue, Mr. Speaker. We need to stop. We need to stop pla ying those political games, Mr. Speaker . And do you know why we need to do that, Mr. Speaker? Because everyone can point a finger. But when you point a fi nger there is at least four pointing back at you. Now, Mr. Speaker, I was sent an e- mail shor tly after December 2 nd and I asked the media to do some investigation as to who sent this e- mail around. But the media is busy. I give them that excuse; I give them that out. I asked them to find out who sent out this e -mail. It is how to conduct peaceful demonstrations. Carry signage or placards: “I am here for Ber-mudian children,” “We are peaceful Bermudians,” “Why won’t you listen to Bermudians ?” It says, “Clothing and supplies: If you are wil ling to face aggressive actions by the police and/or regiment, come prepared with the following protective clothing , bring extras if you can. Jacket with a hood to protect against pepper spray, tear gas, and prevent grabbing of hair; Eye covering— goggles, sunglasses, dampened bandanas; scarves to block pepper spray especially for nose and mouth; bottled water to rinse the skin and eyes .” And look at this, Mr. Speaker, “not Aquafina or Dunkley’s” so this is a Bermudian e- mail. Mr. Speaker, it goes on to say, “Team work tactics: If police escalate, the front two rows will sit down in a tight formation and join arms. If police deploy pepper spray, tie wet bandanas over your nose and we will have people prepared with water to treat you. Media contacts,” —interesting —“Media contacts: Other persons will film and document any form of vi olence against Bermudians by police or regiment. Any footage of violence against Bermudians should be sent to the following local and international media.” Mr. Speaker, I read it to say that everyone shoulders some blame for what happened on December 2 nd. I challenge Members on that side to get up and say that knew not of that e- mail and they did not support it, Mr. Speaker. I challenge them. And join me in finding out who sent that around, Mr. Speaker .
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainPoint of order, Mr. Speaker . Point of order. The Member is misleading the House. I can categorically state that I knew nothing about that e-mail and I include my colleagues in that statement. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member . [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou are lucky, Honourable Member , you are very lucky. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: I heard my Honourable colleague say an interpolation across the floor. Mr. Speaker, those— [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: The Honourable Member says they were organised and so what, Mr. Speaker —
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberExactly. So what?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member , that is enough! Carry on, Premier. Hon. Michael H. Du nkley: So, Mr. Speaker , I do not want Members on that side to stand up with bleeding, pure hearts because we all have some blame in the situation on December 2 nd.
Mr. Walter H. RobanPoint of order, Mr. Speaker . Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes? POINT OF ORDER [Imputing improper motives]
Mr.
Walter H. RobanThe Honourable Member is imputing improper motives, and unless he can table that e- mail, Mr. Speaker, and show evidence that a nyone on this side is responsible for that, he should not associate us with that e- mail.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. 602 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Walter H. Roban: He is imputing improper m otives by suggesting we have something to do with it.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member.
Mr. Walter H. RobanMy Members have said clearly we have nothing to do with that activity.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerI appreciate that. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker , I sat by qu ietly all day and listened. I listened to comments from that side that were absurd. I listened to honourable colleagues being called liars, and language such as that. So, Mr. Speaker, that point of order from …
I appreciate that. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker , I sat by qu ietly all day and listened. I listened to comments from that side that were absurd. I listened to honourable colleagues being called liars, and language such as that. So, Mr. Speaker, that point of order from that Honourable Member is shallow rhetoric, Mr. Speaker, because the truth hurts. Now, Mr. Speaker, as I start my comments specifi cally to the airport (because some Members never spoke about the airport), I want to start with two simple points, Mr. Speaker. We need a new airport. I think everyone in this Honourable Chamber would agree we need a new airport. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I heard one Member on that side say that it was not in a platform so we should not do it. But, Mr. Speaker — [Inaudible interjections] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: All of a sudden at two o’clock in the morning they have woken up. And I am glad they have woken up. Mr. Speaker, even the PLP knew back in 2006, 2007, 2008, that we needed a new airport b ecause they developed plans for it, but really did not tell anybody about it. Is that accountability? Is that transparency, Mr. Speaker? Build a new airport where my honourable colleague from constituency 12, the Mini ster of Works, talked about some of the plans for the new airport. It even had a sports field down there. It even had a marina down there, Mr. Speaker . It was indeed going to be iconic, Mr. Speaker. That is one point. We all know we need a new airport. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, this project is good for Bermuda. It is good for the hundreds of Bermudians who will have a job during the 40 months (approx imately) of construction and for their families all across the Island who that job will help support. We have heard tonight some comments about how many jobs there will be there, Mr. Speaker . We are to the point now where we are arguing the number of jobs —not the opportunity that this does create good jobs for Bermudians, Mr. Speaker . This project is good for the many Bermudians who will find a career in an energised aviation industry just like the Honourable Member from constituency 24 talks about the aviation industry that he loves. This man is a growing testament to the careers in the avi ation industry. This project is good for that. We have already seen it now, Mr. Speaker, with the seven i nterns that Aecon has given a wonderful opportunity to. Mr. Speaker, good for many local businesses that take advantage of the service and sales opportunities that the airport redevelopment project will create. Mr. Speaker, it is certainly good for the airport staff who will w ork in a 21 st century facility and for all of those crews whose long forbearance will finally see the end to deteriorating working conditions. Mr. Speaker, good for the hundreds of thousands of people who go through the airport every year, whether it is international business, whether it is our tourism people who come here. And good for the people of Bermuda, Mr. Speaker, who will benefit from this redevelopment of the terminal and allow us to do it without serious deficit and debt challenges to achieve something for the greater good. But, Mr. Speaker, from the beginning the O pposition has decried this project . . . and sometimes, Mr. Speaker, I wondered if they decried the project because there were afraid of progress. Sometimes I wondered if they decried the project, Mr. Speaker, because they were disappointed because they could not get it done. Mr. Speaker, this airport redevelopment project has had more scrutiny, more oversight, and more due diligence than any capital project in the history of this Is land. So let me take a moment to review. First, Mr. Speaker, there has been significant cooperation between the UK and Bermuda throughout this whole process. The Government first consulted with the United Kingdom Government about this project back in 2014. There was an agreement to jointly retain the Deloitte Group to conduct an independent review of the project concept involved with CCC. A review, Mr. Speaker, you might recall that referenced the UK Green Book guidelines to ensure that public funds are spent for the public benefit and, Mr. Speaker, in the most efficient way. So, Mr. Speaker, in 2015, in May, Deloitte completed that report. It was followed two months lat-er by the UK Entrustment letter authorising the Go vernment to enter into contract with CCC stipulating, Mr. Speaker (and this is key), deliverables all of which are embodied in today’s legislation. And let me list those for you, Mr. Speaker and colleagues in this House, and those who are enjoying this early morning debate. The cost of cons truction is to be wholly borne by CCC and the selected developer; no project debt on Government’s balance sheet ; agreement on measures to address initial deficiencies that had been identified by Deloitte in that report I just mentioned; and pre- contract publication of ev idence- based assurance that re quired measures have, in fact, been taken Mr. Speaker, we move on from there and we saw the completion, I think towards the end of the last year, of two major, critical milestones. First, Gover nment’s Entrustment Report fulfilling the critical r equirements from the Foreign and Commonwealth O ffice (FCO) pertaining to value for money, cost -risk
Bermuda House of Assembly benefit, commercial viability, financial affordability and, Mr. Speaker, social benefits. Secondly, and the Honourable Member who just took his seat from constituency 24 talks about the Blue Ribbon Panel and their lack of aviation transport experience. The Value for Money Assessment by Steer Davies and Gleave, Mr. Speaker —and I will say this very slowly and clearly —an independent, international transport consulting firm chosen. Mr. Speaker, this firm, which I have not seen anybody belittle the curriculum and path performance that they bring to the table, has reviewed this project. And the Honourable Minister of Finance in his brief about 10 or 12 hours ago alluded to some of the comments. But let me just deal with one main point, and I will quote right from the report. The project o ption the Government was pursuing delivered value for money while meeting Bermuda’s strategic objectives and minimising financial costs to the Government, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, I think it is very clear that when this Government undertook to form this Government to Government relationship we have yielded signif icant strengths. It maximises jobs, career and business opportunities for Bermudians, Mr. Speaker. I heard a lot of conversation earlier today about Canada and everything being exported to Canada. Mr. Speaker, that is outright nonsense. Mr. Speaker, this arrangement allows the pr oject to get built on time, on spec, and on budget. And I have heard very little conversation about that today, and I would have thought that I would have a number of honourable colleagues speak to that aspect specif ically because the challenges we have had for many years under successive Governments in getting on time, on spec, and on budget.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWe will see how that works. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member says we will see how it works out. Yes, we will. And we will not forget. Mr. Speaker, it also stimulates economic growth with no increase in national debt. Also, last November there was yet …
We will see how that works. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member says we will see how it works out. Yes, we will. And we will not forget. Mr. Speaker, it also stimulates economic growth with no increase in national debt. Also, last November there was yet another critical screening of this project, this time by the experts from the Inde-pendent Airport Counsel which the Honourable Member from constituency 24 failed to mention again. Colleagues in this Honourable Chamber have mentioned them. Certainly, colleague, MP Crockwell from con-stituency 31 spoke in detail about the Airport Counsel and a lady who gave an assessment here and they clearly concluded that the deal was creative, r esourc eful and solid. Now, Mr. Speaker, we cannot forget the preeminence of this organisation with, I think, over 600 memb ers running just under 2,000 airports, Mr. Speaker . So, clearly, that is like E. F. Hutton. When they speak, you listen, Mr. Speaker . Then early this year, in order to bring more clarity and understanding and oversight to this project, the Minister of Finance in his wisdom appointed the Blue Ribbon Panel. And I want to take this opportunity early this morning to publicly thank the chairman, Mal-colm Butterfield and all his colleagues —Barclay Si mmons, Caroline Foulger, Tony Joaquin, Craig Simmons and Gil Tuc ker, Mr. Speaker, for their dedic ation, their work, their interviews and their full applic ation of their vast collective experience that they bring to the table. They delivered a report a couple of days ago that is certainly an easy read with an excellent overview of the project. Now, Mr. Speaker, much has been said. But it is important to reemphasise the foundation of that r eport. And I quote from the executive section, “we have found this transaction is commercially sound and rea-sonable, likely to meet the Government's stated objec-tives of long term sustainability, increased traffic volume and revenue, while effectively providing for the structural needs of the airport.” That is pretty conclusive, Mr. Speaker . It goes on to say, “We have also found that its terms are wit hin the parameters for similar P3 Airport projects and in some cases ,” Mr. Speaker, “[this project ] exceeds those norms.” Eminently qualified Bermudians, friends of many in this room, who have come forward to pr ovide a thorough review of this project to supplement work that has already been done. Now, Mr. Speaker —
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYou have two minutes. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Yes, Mr. Speaker . At times there has been a great deal of misi nformation that has been spread on this project. I want to wind up my comments by thanking the Honourable Finance Minister for sticking to it . . . …
You have two minutes. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Yes, Mr. Speaker . At times there has been a great deal of misi nformation that has been spread on this project. I want to wind up my comments by thanking the Honourable Finance Minister for sticking to it . . . sticking to it, answering the questions and proving what this Gover nment stands for. There is inclusivity in this project, Mr. Speaker, because it is a commitment to maximise the opportunities for Bermudian labour and business. There is responsibility in working, Mr. Speaker, and this is a critical p oint, within our means to build a str ategic asset without impacting the debt situation. Mr. Speaker, there is opportunity in virtually every aspect of this project —from the jobs and bus iness opportunities generated by construction and to career opportuni ties in aviation. And, Mr. Speaker, there is integrity in our commitment in working for the good management of Bermuda’s public affairs in keeping the oath we took as servants to the people we serve. As I said at the start of my comments, Mr. Speaker, this is a good project for the people of Bermuda. The foundation of success for any country de-pends on building and maintaining an infrastructure that enables its people to earn a living and their econ604 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly omy to grow and prosper. Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what this Government is doing Thank you, sir.
[Desk thumping]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Premier Any other Honourable Member care to speak? Then the Finance Minister can wrap up. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker , we have been here a long time. I have a few notes that I have written on this debate. First of all, let …
Thank you, Premier Any other Honourable Member care to speak? Then the Finance Minister can wrap up. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker , we have been here a long time. I have a few notes that I have written on this debate. First of all, let me say that there has been a lot of talk about giving money to Aecon— [Timer beeps] [Laughter] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: My remarks are that short— [Laughter] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: —giving money and gi ving profits to Aecon. And I would just like to sort of speak on that for a moment, Mr. Speaker . Just to use an analogy, if you hand over a $35,000 cheque to a car dealer to buy a car, are you giving them a $35,000 cheque? No. You are buying a car because it is a transaction. The money goes one way, the car goes another way. It is an exchange. And the exchange rate is called the price. That is how transactions work. It is not a gift. A gift is what we used to call at the BMA when I was doing balance of payments an “unrequited transfer.” Something like giving money to the Haiti Fund. That is a gift. Som ething that you do not expect [anything] back for. So, what is happening here? There are rev enues being transferred from the Government to Skyport. Is that a gift? Certainly not. It is a transaction. What are we getting back in return for transferring those revenues? Well, we are getting a new airport terminal. Just like buying a car. We are get ting a new . . . a transfer of assets, and we are getting that big as-set called a new airport terminal that we will own from the moment it is built. But that is the essence of the transaction. All this stuff about huge profits is strictly imaginary because the rate of return of Skyport is defined in the Project Agreement as internal rate of return of 15.9 per cent. That is their target. I mentioned in my opening remarks that that 15.9 [per cent] is not guaranteed. People are behaving like that money is som ehow guaranteed, that they are definitely going to get it. They would like to get it, but it is not guaranteed. Some Members on the other side, because they can put numbers in a spreadsheet that take you out to the future, seem to think that they can predict the future. They cannot. Nobody knows what is going to happen. There are risks involved and that is why the target rate of return is 15.9 per cent, because Skyport would be taking on a heck of a lot risk. And in addition to that they are paying a heck of a lot of ex-penses, like cash outflows, the operating expenses, the staff, et cetera, salaries, to maintain the facility, contingencies and they have to pay off the mortgage which is huge. They have to pay all of that. So they have to pay all of those things before they can think about getting that 15.9 per cent internal rate of return. So this profit is not guaranteed. So, when the value for money assessor, Steer Davies Gleave, looked at this, they said that that 15.9 per cent internal rate of return was a rate of r eturn that was consistent with other P3 projects that they saw around the world. And they are a world- class company that . . . they do this work all around the world. So that is what they said. It is not outrageous. It is not ripping anybody off. It is consistent with what happens in the marketplace. I made comments about the marketplace before. People over there seemed to be astounded, but I guess they do not do too much in the marketplace. The marketplace has its demands. This is reality. The marketplace has this demand so you have to compare this to what happens in the marketplace. And this is consistent with what happens in the marketplace and the revenue sharing takes place after the equity investors get all their money back in dividends and I have explained that. So the notion that has been repeated over and over again that this alien force is sucking money out of Bermuda from this project is just not true. It is inflammatory —and unnecessarily inflammatory. It is political rhetoric t o try to throw doubt over a project that has been, unfortunately, long and torturous, but has been well thought out. So those words are false. I just want to say one or two other things, Mr. Speaker . A lot of the projections and the statements that have come from the other side in this debate seem to have forgotten all about this problem of the debt. The problem of the debt is an overriding factor of all of this, Mr. Speaker . If it was not for the fact that this Government has $2.4 billion of debt, we woul d not even be considering this. If we were in the situation, the debt situation, that this Government was in 20 years ago . . . you know, we would not be talking about CCC or Aecon or any of that stuff because we would be in such a good state that we could go to the markets, borrow this money and build the airport and pay it off just like anyone would be buying a house. We are doing this because of the situation we are in —the debt situation. And the alternatives that I heard come from the other side do not seem to take that into account. Somebody said earlier, well, you know, they thought that they could get this financing for this thing
Bermuda House of Assembly done at HSBC. But guess what? When you go down to HSBC and you borrow the money, you add to your debt. This transaction does not do that. I heard people say, well, you know you can get a bunch of folks in Bermuda together and gather together some money. But what is that going to do? You give it to the Government, it is going to be debt. You cannot own the Government. You cannot take equity positions in the Government. It is borrowing. To avoid adding capital debt for this project we have to do some sort of off -balance sheet financing. All the ideas that I have heard coming from the other side do not take that into account. Therefore, they will meet the number one criteria that the Ministry of Finance set when we started this. We want to look for a financing solution that does not add to the na-tional debt, because we are already in peril on that score. Now, I heard one of t he Honourable Member s mention the fact that the chairman of the Blue Ribbon Committee was involved with KPMG when they did the hospital transaction. For some reason he put that in a light that there was something wrong with that, or that there was a problem, maybe even a conflict. Well, you know, first place, Mr. Butterfield is retired from KPMG and has been retired for three years. But the fact that he did that transaction is one of the reasons why I wanted him on that Blue Ribbon Panel — because he has the expertise. He has the experience. That is why he was a vital person to have on that panel. That is a great example of how somebody could take something that is a positive for this and try to make it into a negative. It is a positive because the man has experience. Not experience in Timbuktu, T oronto, in Dayton, Ohio, he has experience here in Bermuda. Invaluable experience. So it is a big plus for us. You know, Mr. Speaker, I have been hearing all this stuff about the financial model and how they do not have the financial model so that they cannot know whether or not they are getting a good deal. Mr. Speaker, you go down to the bank and take a loan at the bank and they are charging you 25 per cent for that loan. You do not have to know the bank’s financial model to know that you are getting ripped off. You do not have to know the bank’s financial model. The only thing you know is you can go around the corner to another bank and get a loan of 5 per cent. So you do not have to know the financial model to know whether you are getting good value. So this stuff that you are hearing from the Opposition is shear rubbish! It is one of those things, they just throw that red herring in there and I tell you . . . I swear . . . if on the outside chance we could give them the financial model (which I have said that we cannot because the other partners say no, but on the outside chance that they said yes), I know that they would find some other reason to object. They would make it up. So, you know, all this stuff about f inancial models is not . . . we have given them all the infor-mation that is required to make an assessment of this transaction. The Blue Ribbon Panel was asked, Did you see the financial model? The answer was no. They were asked, Can you make a proper asses sment without it? They said, Y es, we can. We have all kinds of financial information. We do not need the f inancial model . So, this is a red herring that the Opposition have blown up into a blimp. The fact is that the Blue Ribbon Panel confirmed that this was a good deal for Bermuda. The value for money assessor, Steer D avies Gleave, said that this was a good deal for Ber-muda. What the Opposition wants us to believe is that all the experts are wrong and they are right. That is what they want us to believe. Now, where are their experts? Where are their experts? I guess they are relying on Mr. Mayor but his numbers have been comprehensively rebuked by the Blue Ribbon Panel —comprehensively! So, that needs to be dealt with Now, one of the criticisms that I heard from the other side was that . . . and this is also a criticism from the Blue Ribbon Panel. That the communications could have been better, it could have been clearer and have added to the problem. You know, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, I take that on personally. And if that is true, it is my fault because I have been doing most of the communicating. So that is on me. No question about that. But I have to say, if this process is different . . . now, I do not know how many people here . . . I do not think . . . certainly none of the Members of the Opposition went . . . maybe that is not true. I think maybe one or two of them actually attended at least one of my PowerPoint presentations that I have done around the Island over the last year. But in that Po werPoint presentation I described how the transaction goes in phases. It is a phased transaction. It goes in phases. And I have just put in front of me here, phase 1 is for exploration, scoping and data collection. Phase 2 is for framework definition, commitments and liabilities, design and detail costing, finance and detail finalisation of contracts, independent fairness as-sessment, local tendering and addressing legal i ssues. Now, all of that time that we are in those first two phases, Mr. Speaker, we ha ve been communicating with the Bermudian public of how it is going. But you can see, this is a developmental thing. So when we started out there were some things that changed that when the Honourable Member Mr. De Silva says, you know, we said originally t he bridge was in there and then the bridge was not . . . this is part of the developmental process. The fact is, we could not have the bridge in there because the rev enues of the airport cannot support the bridge. It is as 606 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly simple as that. So we had to get rid of the bridge from the equation. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Why did the price drop then? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The price changed as we got more detailed information of how much it would cost to build the terminal.
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: They just pulled it out of a hat?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member , Honourable Member — Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: No! [Gavel] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Honourable Member wants to know if we pulled it out of a hat. That is the reason that they can take this risk of being tied down to a price. They …
Honourable Member , Honourable Member —
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: No! [Gavel] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Honourable Member wants to know if we pulled it out of a hat. That is the reason that they can take this risk of being tied down to a price. They can take that risk because they are so careful. They assess, they reassess, they re- reassess and they keep doing it irritably until they are sure of how much things are going to cost. And as that price evolves, it has changed over time. That is why things that I have reported to the Bermudian people have changed over time because of this i terative process that we have been involved in. A bit confusing, I know. Perhaps it has undermined the credibility . Perhaps ; but that is the process. And we have been open with the Bermudian public as to what the situation was at the time. Now we are just at the end . . . we are very sure of what the numbers are now, but during the last 18 months it has been a thing that has been in motion, Mr. Speaker . It just has been the nature of the beast. When I compare that to what the former Government did with the hospital, they conducted their negotiati ons in total secret. So much so that they had everything in Toronto so that nobody in Bermuda would know. T here is the contrast —so secret that it has to be done off the Island; or doing it and reporting to people as you go along. That is what we have been doing. And in spite of the fact we were doing that we are being accused of being non- transparent. I mean, how ironic is that? How ironic is that? [Inaudible interjections] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: You know ? So that is the reason that these things have happened. [Inaudible interjections] [Gavel] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Now, I have said it b efore, and I will reiterate this thing that, you know, one can want something or want to do something in a particular way , but the marketplace has its own demands, Mr. Speaker . And for somebody to somehow either doubt that or find that to be kind of odd is the result of people who do not know anything about business or do not have experience in business. The marketplace demands certain things. One of the things that we had to do with this . . . we had a certain type of insurance on this deal that we had to completely throw away because the debt markets would not accept that type of insurance pol icy. I mean, just as an example. And, you know, if you were going to borrow that money, in that market we had to use that insurance model. And the insurance people . . . we got into a big argument with the insurance people. We had a big argument with the lawyers . I think the Attorney Gen eral will remember that because we were dealing with that in project board. But we basically had to take what the market said. If you want our money, you have to do it this way. Those are what I am talking about , the demands of the market. You might want to do something, but if you want to do this deal, you have to do it their way. And, you know, there was a notion somehow that we gave Aecon everything they wanted. Well, how wrong is that ! How wrong is that ! We negotiated a really good deal for the people of Bermuda. I am telling you. I tell you that, Mr. Speaker, I tell everybody that. You see that 50/50 profit sharing? That was not on the table when we first started this. It was not on the table. That is one of the things that we negotiated. We negotiated a number of things that were not on offer at first , but we just kept plugging away at it until we got something that was better. So, to think that somehow we were just there as order takers, that just was not the case at all. So we have gotten what I think is a creditable deal for the people of Bermuda and this project is one that will be good for Bermuda. I think someone said, w ell, you know , in the beginning we did not tell Bermudians in our platform or early in the game that we were going to look at building a new airport. That is true. But what we did say was that we were going to encourage capital pr ojects to bring inward direct investment into Bermuda. That is what we said. We were going to encourage inward direct investment into this Island. We said that before the last election, because I know I said it — many times. And that is what this is. This is inward direct investment into Bermuda. It is just like building a hotel , except we are building an airport terminal and we are building it using parameters that are co nstrained by the fact that the Government of Bermuda is up to its eyeballs in debt. So we are getting that economic stimulus in spite of the fact that we are up to our eyeballs in debt. So we have a win– win situation here. And it is part of the original strategy that this party put forward
Bermuda House of Assembly when it was in Opposition leading up to the next election. So do not let anybody tell you that, all of a sudden, this thing fell from the sky. It is not true. It may not have been in the Throne Speech, but I can guarantee you one thing. It was in my budget speeches. The first time this thing was announced an ywhere in Bermuda was right here at this desk in a budget speech. So do not let anybody say that all of a sudden I met somebody and this thing dropped from the sky , like somebody was trying to say over there. That is nonsense. We have been looking for inward direct investment as a Minister and as a Government from the day we became the Government to try and stimulate this economy and get us out of reces sion. And guess what, Mr. Speaker? We are out of that recession. And we have these inward inves tments. So we are being successful and this is going to be another one of our successes in stimulating this economy, creating jobs for our people. So, at the bottom line here, Mr. Speaker, are we going to believe the experts or not. The Honour able Member from [constituency] 24 says that the Blue Ribbon Panel were not experts at aviation. Nobody asked them to comment on aviation. Nobody asked them to make an analysis of aviation. They were asked to make a financial analysis , and they are all financial experts. So the public of Bermuda has t a choice: Do you believe the experts who are impar tial, who, some of them Bermudian, some of them for eign; or are we going to believe the Opposition’s ex perts who, the last time I heard, have none? So that is the choice that Bermudians need to make on this partic ular matter, Mr. Speaker. I keep hearing that this thing is shrouded in secrecy. The fact is that if it was shrouded in secrecy , I do not know how the Opposition Leader could come up with a spreadsheet this big, because he got these numbers —
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberFrom you. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: He got these numbers from us. So if it was shrouded in secrecy , how did he get the numbers? It has not been shrouded in secrecy. It has not been shrouded in secrecy. We have divulged more information on this transaction, as …
From you.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: He got these numbers from us. So if it was shrouded in secrecy , how did he get the numbers? It has not been shrouded in secrecy. It has not been shrouded in secrecy. We have divulged more information on this transaction, as the Premier said, than any other transaction in history —over 1,000 pa ges. The Project Agreement is 600; the ADA with the schedules was about 300 and all the other things that we have done . . . 1,000 pages. So those are all my wrap -up remarks now, Mr. Speaker, and I would like to move that the Bill now be committed.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Thank you, Honourable Members. It has been moved that the Bill be committed. Any objections to that? Then I would like the Deputy to take the Chair [of Committee] . House in Committee at 2:38 am [Saturday, 11 February 2017] COMMITTEE ON BILL [Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Chairman] …
The ChairmanChairmanMembers, we are now in Committee of the whole [House] for further consideration of the Bill entitled , Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2016 . I call on the Minister in charge to pr oceed. Minister, you have the floor. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chair …
Members, we are now in Committee of the whole [House] for further consideration of the Bill entitled , Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2016 . I call on the Minister in charge to pr oceed. Minister, you have the floor. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chair man, this Bill , the Bermuda Ai rport Authority Bill 2016 (to be amended to the Berm uda Airport Authority Bill 2017), is that the Authority will take on the responsibility for the general administr ation, control , and management of the L. F. Wade I nternational Airport , and to oversee the redevelopment of the Airport and its maintenance and operation by the Canadian c ommercial corporation, the Crown Corporation of Canada, so- called Developer. I would like to move clauses 1 through 7.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. But, Minister, the first thing we are going to do is I am going to have appro val for the amendment of the title as you just pointed out. I t has been moved that the amendment to the title be from Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2016 to …
Thank you. But, Minister, the first thing we are going to do is I am going to have appro val for the amendment of the title as you just pointed out. I t has been moved that the amendment to the title be from Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2016 to now read Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to.
[Gavel]
[Motion carried: Amendment to passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 1 through 7 be moved. Any objection to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, c lause 1 is the citation. Clause 2 is the interpretation section. In clause 2, I have the amendment here, Madam Chairman, I …
The ChairmanChairmanYou have an amendment to clause 2? 608 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes.
The ChairmanChairmanDoes everyone have a copy of the proposed amendments to clause 2? I heard a no. [Inaudible interject ions]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister, please proceed. AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 2 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: In clause 2, we delete the definition of authorised person and substitute “ ‘authorised’ person means any person authorised in writing by the Governor to exercise a particular function of power pursuant to any Air Navigation ( Overseas …
Minister, please proceed.
AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 2
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: In clause 2, we delete the definition of authorised person and substitute “ ‘authorised’ person means any person authorised in writing by the Governor to exercise a particular function of power pursuant to any Air Navigation ( Overseas Terr itories) Order.” In clause 2, in the definition of “Airport Lands ”, insert after “Schedule 1” the words “and Schedule 2.” Also in clause 2, in the definition of “Letter of Entrustment ” delete the words “Director Overseas Territories” ; and I think that is all for c lause 2.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members that would like to speak to the amendments to clause 2? No? There are no Members that would like to speak to the amendments to clause 2? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, c lause 3 provides for the establishment of the Authority …
The ChairmanChairmanMember , just to keep it tidy, if there are no objections to the amendments to c lause 2. Is there anyone that wants to speak to clause 2?
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberAbsolutely.
The ChairmanChairmanPerfect. Okay. If you do not mind . . . no, we are not going to proceed — Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Do you want me to move those?
The ChairmanChairmanWe are just going to move clauses 1 and 2. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Okay.
The ChairmanChairmanSo are there any Members that would like to speak to c lauses 1 through 2? Hon. E. David Burt: Yes.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Opposition Leader. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. Speaking specifically to clause 2, under the Interpretation section, under the item of the “ Agre ement ” where it speaks to the “‘Agreement ’ means collectively, the entirety of the intended agreement between …
The Chair recognises the Opposition Leader. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. Speaking specifically to clause 2, under the Interpretation section, under the item of the “ Agre ement ” where it speaks to the “‘Agreement ’ means collectively, the entirety of the intended agreement between the Developer and the Authority for the redevelopment and operation”, and we know that there is this very large Agreement here that has many differ-ent items in it. Specifically, Madam Chairman, I would like to refer to section 19.2.2 of the Project Agreement where it states when discussing the application of public ac-cess to information to this deal. And I would ask the Minister if he could, and possibly in conference be-cause I know he has his lawyers here, where in section 19.2.2 of the Project Agreement it says “Each party hereby confirms, acknowledges, and agrees that all information related to this Agreement and any and all undertakings, activities, and operations and any con-nections to this Agreement is highly confidential and commercially sensitive to all parties.” Then it says, “Without limiting the foregoing, each party further confirms, acknowledges, and agrees that the terms and conditions in this Agree-ment and any and all information concerning each party’s respective performance of this Agreement constitutes a proprietary, confidential, and completely sensitive commercial, material, technical, business and/or financial information of the Authority and Pr oject Co except as otherwise expressly provided herein and neither party shall consent to the release or di sclosure of any of the foregoing information to any person whatsoever.” In mentioning that, Madam Chairman, is it the Minister’s interpretation that this section completel y excludes any information in the airport from being di sclosed at any PATI requests or even disclosed in the performance of this Agreement to the Parliament itself?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Rich ards: I am not sure what that has to do with clause 2. [Inaudible interjection] The Ch ai rman: I would appreciate it, because I am lost— Hon. E. David Burt: Oh, absolutely —
The ChairmanChairmanI figured it was the time. Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. E. David Burt: In clause 2 we are dealing with the Interpretation. Again, the Interpretation speaks about the Agreement. Underneath the Agreement it means collectively the entirety of the intended Agree-ment betw een the Developer . . . we …
I figured it was the time.
Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. E. David Burt: In clause 2 we are dealing with the Interpretation. Again, the Interpretation speaks about the Agreement. Underneath the Agreement it means collectively the entirety of the intended Agree-ment betw een the Developer . . . we are talking about the Project Agreement. That is why. The only time that we can examine the items that are inside the Project Agreement is here. If we are giving the Bermuda Airport Authority the authority to enter into the Project Agreement, the only time that we will ever get to dis-cuss what is inside t his document is right now. Inside of this Agreement, what we are saying is that we will now have an airport that is going to be operated by a private partner, which seems to be outside of any type of scrutiny of public access to infor-mation and/or otherwise. That is why I am asking the Minister the question because he has clearly negot iated this deal, or his lawyers have negotiated this deal, and I want clarity to Parliament that there will be no type of PATI requests or any type of disclosure for the airport.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: There is a confidentiality agreement in clause 17, Madam Chairman. I do not agree with the Honourable Member, though. We are not debating the Project Agreement. We are debat ing the clauses here. We are not debating the Project Agreement. …
The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: There is a confidentiality agreement in clause 17, Madam Chairman. I do not agree with the Honourable Member, though. We are not debating the Project Agreement. We are debat ing the clauses here. We are not debating the Project Agreement. The Project Agreement does not have to be approved by the Parliament. We are debating this Act. So . . .
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. We have to stay with the Act which is in front of us, which is probably why I could not follow . . . I am sorry; I just could not follow. So if someone can help me— Hon. E. David Burt: I am in no way, …
Thank you, Member. We have to stay with the Act which is in front of us, which is probably why I could not follow . . . I am sorry; I just could not follow. So if someone can help me—
Hon. E. David Burt: I am in no way, shape, or form attempting to belabour this discussion as I am quite sure at 2:46 am . . . when I get hom e, my daughter will be right there at 7:00 am going Daddy, daddy, daddy . But the fact of the matter is, Madam Chairman, no, we are not debating the Project Agreement. But inside of this Act is reference to the Project Agreement. It is a very specific question which was asked. The Mini ster’s lawyers are there, I would like to have clarity for the House, and it is very simple. Inside this Agreement . . . because we are giving the Airport Authority the authority to enter into this Agreement. That is what we are doing inside of this clause and, therefore, the question is, and I want it to be clear to all Members of Parliament that they understand what is taking place with this, does that mean that anything that takes place under this new private company is going to be completely shielded from disclosure to Members of Parliament and through the Public Access to Information [Act]? That is the question that is being asked. There is a very large disclosure here and it says, if I may say again, “Without limiting the foregoing each party further confirms, acknowledges, and agrees that the terms and conditions in this Agree-ment and all information concerning each party’s r espective performance of this Agreement and so it shall not be disclosed to anybody. ” So the question is, does this just mean that this Agreement, once signed, is completely exclusive from parliamentary oversight at all? That is the ques-tion that needs to be [answered] —for Public Access to Information or otherwise.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Bermuda Airport A uthority is a public authority so it would be subject to PATI, I would say subject to the Confidentiality Agreement on clause 17.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Mem bers that would like to speak . . . if someone has a question, please make it come through the Chair. Thank you very much. The Chair recognises the Opposition Leader. Hon. E. David Burt: I thank the Minister for his a nswer. …
Thank you. Are there any other Mem bers that would like to speak . . . if someone has a question, please make it come through the Chair. Thank you very much. The Chair recognises the Opposition Leader.
Hon. E. David Burt: I thank the Minister for his a nswer. I am not sure where he is in clause 17, though.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It is the Confidentiality Agreement.
Hon. E. David Burt: In . . . do you mean Schedule 17? Or clause 17—
[Inaudible interjections]
The ChairmanChairmanI believe what we are referring to here, which I think we have just discovered, and you could correct me if I am wrong, but on page 6— [Crosstalk ]
The ChairmanChairman[ Page] 6, [clause 2] Interpretations, we have got on the bottom “‘Project Agreement’ means the agreement” . . . is that not what you are referring to? Hon. E. David Burt: No.
The ChairmanChairmanOkay. Hon. E. David Burt: Just to be clear, the Minister in his response said that the Airport Authority is a public 610 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly authority and will be subject to PATI. I understand that. That is not the question. The question …
Okay. Hon. E. David Burt: Just to be clear, the Minister in his response said that the Airport Authority is a public 610 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly authority and will be subject to PATI. I understand that. That is not the question. The question is regarding the operations and anything that takes place with Bermuda Skyport which is a public/private partnership underneath this Agree-ment, and the performance of its obligations under-neath this Agreement. According to this, it is not able to be disclosed by any party, by PATI, and/or to the Parliament. So the question that I am asking is specifically, Does this section exclude Bermuda Skyport from any type of parliamentary scrutiny which may take place in the future?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I do not think it excludes anything other than what it says. You know, I said it is subject to PATI, but the Project Agreement says what it says that the arrangements are confidential.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberOkay, so that is the answer? [Crosstalk] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: So they are.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 36— and we are staying on clause 2. Hon. Michael J. Scott: I recognise I am on Interpret ation, clause 2. Sometimes the law says, Mr. Minister, that you cannot contract yourself out of statutory oblig ations. This happens, always. …
Thank you. The Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 36— and we are staying on clause 2. Hon. Michael J. Scott: I recognise I am on Interpret ation, clause 2. Sometimes the law says, Mr. Minister, that you cannot contract yourself out of statutory oblig ations. This happens, always. What we are asking is, Is this contract, Project Agreement Act, the clause to which the Leader has drawn your attention to and counsel . . . is it seeking to contract out of a statutory obligation, which the Minister has confirmed is a stat utory liability or a statutory obligation to be subject to PATI . . . does this Act . . . I beg your pardon, does this Agreement contract out? If there could be a legal answer to that, that may help us.
[Pause and crosstalk]
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Not parliamentary oversight, but certainly PATI oversight. You know, you cannot contract out of PATI. Right? That is what I have got here. So insofar as Skyport is concerned you can get information [about] Skyport’s transactions with the …
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Not parliamentary oversight, but certainly PATI oversight. You know, you cannot contract out of PATI. Right? That is what I have got here. So insofar as Skyport is concerned you can get information [about] Skyport’s transactions with the Bermuda Airport Au-thority. But there will be, I believe . . . I am looking at my technical guys, but I believe that Skyport has to make all kinds of reports and that sort of thing, mont hly reports, to the Bermuda Airport Authority to monitor their activities. I would have thought that would be subject to PATI as well. So, those rep orts . . . anything that goes into the Bermuda Airport Authority would be subject to PATI . . . subject to whatever that clause 17 says.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clause 2? The Chair recognises the Opposition Leader. Hon. E. David Burt: I thank the Minister for his a nswer, because he says that anything to deal with the reporting of Skyport that goes to the Bermuda …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clause 2? The Chair recognises the Opposition Leader. Hon. E. David Burt: I thank the Minister for his a nswer, because he says that anything to deal with the reporting of Skyport that goes to the Bermuda Airport Authority, however, the Project Agreement states, “that confirms, acknowledges, and agrees that the terms and conditions of this Agreement and all infor-mation concerning each party’s respective performance of this Agreement. ” So in one case you are saying that items have to be filed with the Authority, but in this it is saying anything of the performance underneath this Agreement, which would be the items that are filed with the Authority, constitutes the proprietary confidential, competitively sensitive, commercial, technical bus iness and/or financial business of the Authority and Project Co, except as otherwise expressly provided within, neither party shall consent to the release or the disclosure of any of the foregoing information to any person whatsoever. So, the text is in contravention to what the Minister is saying. So the question and challenge is here is that at what point in time does anyone get to know the performance or is it just . . . are we just putting this in a secret silo and it will just exist in a secret silo forever?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: As the Honourable Member would know, that legislation in this case—PATI legislation —trumps contracts. That is your answer.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members that would like to speak to clause 2? Would anyone like to speak to clause 2? Hon. E. David Burt: Yes, thank you very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, moving to section 6 of the Project Agreement underneath—
The ChairmanChairmanI just want to point out . . . it is very difficult for me, as I do not have that in front of me. Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. E. David Burt: I am sorry that you do not have it. It was given to me. I cannot answer …
The ChairmanChairmanNo. Now let me be more clear. The Bill that I have in front of me . . . the Bill that I have in front of me, which is titled Bermuda Airport Authority Act . . . while I appreciate what you are saying, I . . . and …
No. Now let me be more clear. The Bill that I have in front of me . . . the Bill that I have in front of me, which is titled Bermuda Airport Authority Act . . . while I appreciate what you are saying, I . . . and our responsibility at this point in Committee is to debate the Bill that is before us.
Hon. E. David Burt: And I am debating the Bill that is before us, so I am referring to the clause 2 —
The ChairmanChairmanI appreciate that. Hon. E. David Burt: Interpretation Agreement. So I will have . . . I am sorry that your party did not provide you with a copy, but we will be happy to give you one.
The ChairmanChairmanNo. But Member, Member, I totally understand what your position is. Our position is to debate the Bill in front of us and the clauses in front of us, and our Standing Orders are specific on that. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you and we are in clause 2, Madam …
The ChairmanChairmanAnd I do not see the line in the Bill that you are referring to — Hon. E. David Burt: Okay, allow me to help. I will point to it again one more time, Madam Chairman, if we have to.
The ChairmanChairmanYes, please. Hon. E. David Burt: Clause 2 under Interpretation Agreement states —
The ChairmanChairmanCan you — Hon. E. David Burt: —“‘Agreement ’ means collectiv ely, the entirety of the intended agreement between the Developer and the Authority for the redevelopment and operation and maintenance of the Airport, ” (including the amended and restated Project Agre ement ), “as amended, supplemented, extended, renovated or …
Can you —
Hon. E. David Burt: —“‘Agreement ’ means collectiv ely, the entirety of the intended agreement between the Developer and the Authority for the redevelopment and operation and maintenance of the Airport, ” (including the amended and restated Project Agre ement ), “as amended, supplemented, extended, renovated or restated from time to time and each and ev ery other agreement between the Developer and the Authority relating to the Airport by which the Develo per and the Authority or their respective assignees are bound; ” Underneath that it discusses the Project Agreement. I am referring to Schedule 6 of the Project Agreement, which is the Bermudian Labour Plan, which was mentioned in the general debate, where there are a number of things. And inside all of these specifications of labour and Bermudian Labour Plan, it requires, in six [categories], numerous hours of inschool training. For instance, when we talk about a carpenter or we talk about a mason, it talks about approximately 4,880 hours of on- the-job work experience and 720 hours of in- school trai ning. And I am not saying this for any particular way of just poking holes. This thing that I am asking is, Is this something that has been firm? Is this something that has been reviewed by the Government? Because it would seem to somewhat way exclude . . . I mean, my father can build a whole lot of stuff, but he would not qualify underneath this specification here. And there are a whole lot of pr ofessional masons in Bermuda that would not qualify under this as well, electricians, and the otherwise. So the question I have for the Minister is, Is this something that will be held to? And what type of things will be coming from the Department of Labour and Training to ensure that the 720 hours of clas sroom time have been met? Because in my discus-sions with members of Labour and Training, they said that they are going to have to try to find the work to do the training and to get this classroom time. So what plan is there to ensure that Bermudians will actually have this classroom time so that they can fill these jobs? Because it seems like Aecon is excluding a wide swath of Bermudians especially when we are talking about masons and carpenters.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I do not have the answ er to that, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I do not know the answer to that question.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clause 2? Thank you. The Chair recognises the M ember from constituency 29. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, you know, the Opposition Leader talked about the labourers and if …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clause 2? Thank you. The Chair recognises the M ember from constituency 29. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, you know, the Opposition Leader talked about the labourers and if you flip over two pages to—and I declare my interest, it could have been operator and dozer. You know for them to call for 240 hours of in- school training, I can assure you every excavation . . . every excavation, heavy equi pment operator in Bermuda—none of them have had—
An Hon. Member An Hon. Member720— Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Let alone 240 hours. I reckon none of them have had 10 hours of in- school 612 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly training. It does not work like that. So this is a serious issue, and I said …
720—
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Let alone 240 hours. I reckon none of them have had 10 hours of in- school 612 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly training. It does not work like that. So this is a serious issue, and I said earlier in the general debate this gave me concern because you have labourers and Lord knows how many other workers that are looking for work that, to me, this cancels them out. And for the Minister to say that he does not know what to say is not acceptable.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Are there any Members that would like to speak to clause 2? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 17.
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Madam Chairman. A lot of the comments made by my colleagues here, does the Minister see this as a problem and does the Minister see a way forward to redress what could be seen to be an impediment to Bermudians seeking employment opportunities with regard to this project.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises . . . one moment, please. [pause] Thank you. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I do not believe any of this has to do with the interpretation clause, but I think the Honourable Members are pus hing …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises . . . one moment, please. [pause] Thank you. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I do not believe any of this has to do with the interpretation clause, but I think the Honourable Members are pus hing the envelope here. This Committee debated . . . it is not about the Project Agreement, as I said before. However, I can say that this work plan has been the result of close collaboration with the Workforce Deve lopment Department. That much I can say. And it has not been, sort of, plucked out of the sky, so there must be some way that the impediments that you see can be worked around, because I know they spent a lot of time working at Workforce Development in developing the labour plan. But I do not think that any of this has anything to do with the Interpretation [clause] of this Bill.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Minister. Are there any other Members . . . the Chair recognises the Honourable Leader of the Opposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much, Madam Chairman. Despite the Minister’s protestations, the fact is that the only time we will be able to give any type of …
Thank you, Minister. Are there any other Members . . . the Chair recognises the Honourable Leader of the Opposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much, Madam Chairman. Despite the Minister’s protestations, the fact is that the only time we will be able to give any type of scrutiny to this whatsoever is at this point in time. And the Opposition will continue to do its job. The question I will ask the Minister is if he will yield to his Minister responsible for Home Affairs and Workforce Development who, I am sure, may ha ve been involved in this Bermudian Labour Plan and speak as to what type of litigation things are being put in place to ensure that Bermudians will have access to this type of work. As we have heard, there are clas sroom time requirements, that there seems to be no plan for ensuring that people can have these clas sroom time requirements. What is the plan for this g oing forward, and what type of steps may have been taken? If this has been done in consultation with that Minister’s department, then, surely, someone must speak to the preparations that are being made. If the Government has been prepared for this deal going forward and they have lied to their people, they know that it is proceeding, and we know that they have a February 17 th deadline . . . clearly there is a project schedule. What are the plans to ensure that Bermudi-ans will have the requirements that are stated inside of the contract, because they are inside the contract. When this contract is signed, the Bermuda Gover nment cannot all of a sudden s ay, Oh, you have to take these people; it’s here written inside the contract.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Are there any other Members who would like to speak? The Chair recognised the Member from constituency 36. Hon. Michael J. Scott Thank you. Following on from the question just posed by the Leader of the Opposition, as the Minister of [Home Affairs] comes to her feet, …
Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members who would like to speak? The Chair recognised the Member from constituency 36.
Hon. Michael J. Scott Thank you. Following on from the question just posed by the Leader of the Opposition, as the Minister of [Home Affairs] comes to her feet, would she also consider examining the efficacy of these levels of hours? I have been in the House and been practicing for some t ime, and these levels of hours connected with any kind of labour platform training in our Island are strikingly at the moment as extremely high, but the Minister might be able to give me comfort that these are best practice and are typical. So, what is the purpose of these levels of hours of training that have been introduced, albeit into the private contract? I hear what the Minis-ter is saying, but I completely adopt and endorse what the Leader of the Opposition is saying too. Because we have the Project Agreement in front of us and it is inflicted on us and it is incumbent on us to read it with the Project Agreement reference in the Bill that is the real subject of these our Commit-tee discussion.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Bill that we have before us, and as we are all aware of what our responsibilities are in Committee, is the outlining of what the word “Agreement” means. And that is what we are discussing. What does the word “Agreement” mean in the Bill in front …
Thank you, Member. The Bill that we have before us, and as we are all aware of what our responsibilities are in Committee, is the outlining of what the word “Agreement” means. And that is what we are discussing. What does the word “Agreement” mean in the Bill in front of us, not on any other document that is before us, but as per the Bill in front of us. So it is very difficult to elaborate further, and I understand, but while we are looking at the Bill I have to address the Bill we have before us. Thank you very much.
Bermuda House of Assembly Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 2? The Chair recognises —
[Crosstalk] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: We must have a technical glitch.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises — Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Can we move on and come back to clause 2?
The ChairmanChairmanIf that is agreeable. We can move on and then come back to clause 2 in its entirety. Do you want to continue on clause 2, but in another area until that decision is — Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: What I do not want to do is to be …
If that is agreeable. We can move on and then come back to clause 2 in its entirety. Do you want to continue on clause 2, but in another area until that decision is —
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: What I do not want to do is to be standing up here debating the Project Agreement. That is what I do not want us to do.
The ChairmanChairmanAbsolutely. Please proceed. If there are other issues with clause 2, I’d like to recognise the Leader of the Opposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, in clause 2, we have some further definitions where it specifically states the Pr oject Agreement itself. So …
Absolutely. Please proceed. If there are other issues with clause 2, I’d like to recognise the Leader of the Opposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, in clause 2, we have some further definitions where it specifically states the Pr oject Agreement itself. So I ask the Minister specifically regarding the specifications also inside of his view of when it says are Commercial Services under the def initions, “Commercial Services,” and then it says, “ has the meaning set out in the Agreement;” we talked about the Project Agreement itself and it is to deal with the Commercial Services which have not been specified for the Airport. Would the Minister be able to give any type of clarification for Members of the House as to whether or not the Bermuda Skyport has prepared a draft commercial model which is referenced inside the Project Agreement, and whether or not the Minister can give any type of indication as to commercial activities which may be taking place on Airport lands? In addition to that, specifically when we are talking about commercial services, we know that there was a discussion earlier about the items on the Ai rport’s la nds and the leases of which may take place. So, the question is, what type of commercial devel-opments are envisioned under the Commercial Ser-vices specified in the definitions? And can he elaborate as to whether or not any type of draft commercial model has been submitted? Because as we know, under the commercial model they will be given wide latitude for any type of commercial development on the leased lands, and one would expect that during the steering committee of the Airport that the Minister was talking about that there has to be some discussion. Would he be able to provide any clarity to the Parliament of that?
The ChairmanChairmanMember . . . the Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Commercial Services cover a wide range of things from commercial se rvices inside the terminal, like retail services, to things in outbuildings. Certainly, the Airport Authority has to approve all of these things. But I …
Member . . . the Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Commercial Services cover a wide range of things from commercial se rvices inside the terminal, like retail services, to things in outbuildings. Certainly, the Airport Authority has to approve all of these things. But I think there is deliber-ately wide latitude insofar as the Agreement is concerned so that things can be considered. But I do not think at this point in time it is laid out in detail.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: I thank the Minister for his a nswer. However, in the answer the Minister gave, the Minister said that the Airport Authority has to approve these things. However, the Project Agreement specif ically states that …
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: I thank the Minister for his a nswer. However, in the answer the Minister gave, the Minister said that the Airport Authority has to approve these things. However, the Project Agreement specif ically states that items under the commercial model are submitted to the Airport Authority and are not able to be rejected by the Airport Authority. So, the Airport Authority does not have the ability to approve things that are inside the commercial model, unlike the Mi nister has just stated. I will then again ask the Minister is there, has there been a discussion about the proposed commer-cial developments at the Airport on the leased lands, as we understand that in addition to the mail pr ocessing facilities and others which are Government and where Government is currently holding the land and will then have to start paying rent to Aecon, has there been any discussion as to commercial develo pment of which, or may, take place for that? Because the Minister’s interpretation is incorrect. Those type of things do not have to be approved by the Authority. This Agreement gives them carte blanche to come up with a commercial model and they get to do what they want on the land.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Again, I am going to reiterate, before I ask the Minister to stand, what we have in this section, which is entitled “Interpretation” is what the word “interpret ation” means as it pertains to this Bill. While I under-stand what you are looking for, I will point …
Thank you, Member. Again, I am going to reiterate, before I ask the Minister to stand, what we have in this section, which is entitled “Interpretation” is what the word “interpret ation” means as it pertains to this Bill. While I under-stand what you are looking for, I will point out once again that our responsibility in Committee is to review the Bill before us. Thank you very much. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The notion of carte blanche is kind of ridiculous. Nobody has carte blanche in Bermuda They will be subject to Bermuda 614 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly laws, Bermuda regulations, Planning permission, all those normal things will apply to them down there. So they still have to get Government’s permission to do whatever they want.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 2? Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I appreciate the Minister’s response. I will just try to go back to my original question and ask if the Minister is able to give any elaboration …
Thank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 2? Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I appreciate the Minister’s response. I will just try to go back to my original question and ask if the Minister is able to give any elaboration to the Members of Parliament here today as to whether or not it has been, I guess in the Project Board or discussion about any future possible commercial development that might take place in the Airport’s leased lands, if he does have any or not.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Minister, recogni sing the fact that I have already determined what we are discussing here today. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: We do not.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 2? The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you. Back to the Project Agreement, most of the questions which I had specifically . . . of course, we do …
Thank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 2? The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you. Back to the Project Agreement, most of the questions which I had specifically . . . of course, we do not have access to the Financial Model which is refer-enced extensively in Schedule 8 and Schedule 9 of the Project Agreement. But, as you said, we can move back. So I am wondering if there is anything that the Minister of Home Affairs may be able to respond to regarding Schedule 6 so we can move on.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 2? One of the things I would like to do before we go any further within clause 2, if at all possible, is to address the amendments, which were only in certain sections. So if we …
Thank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 2? One of the things I would like to do before we go any further within clause 2, if at all possible, is to address the amendments, which were only in certain sections. So if we could do that, then we could go . . . There are no objections to the amendments that have been put forward to the House, on just the amendments to clause 2. So if there are no objections. Agreed to.
[Gavel] [Motion carried: Amendments to clause 2 passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. That way we can just address . . . the Chair recognises the Finance Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you. Madam Chairman, I would like to continue moving clauses 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Clause 3 provides for the establishment of — The Ch airman: …
Thank you. That way we can just address . . . the Chair recognises the Finance Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you. Madam Chairman, I would like to continue moving clauses 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Clause 3 provides for the establishment of —
The Ch airman: Minister, I just have to put that to the House. So, has it been agreed that we will wait to move clause 2? So now we are going to move clauses 3 — Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Three through seven.
The ChairmanChairmanAny objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 3 provides for the establishment of the Authority as a body corporate. Clause 4 sets out the principal functions of the Authority. Clause 5 makes provision for the Minister to give general directions to the …
Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 3 provides for the establishment of the Authority as a body corporate. Clause 4 sets out the principal functions of the Authority. Clause 5 makes provision for the Minister to give general directions to the Authority. Clause 6 makes provision for the conferment of additional functions by the Government of Bermuda on the Authority. Clause 7 sets out the general duties of the Authority.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 3 through 7? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Leader of the Opposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, in regard to clause 4, r egarding the principal function of the …
Thank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 3 through 7? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Leader of the Opposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, in regard to clause 4, r egarding the principal function of the Authority, clause 4(1)( a), where it says, “notwithstanding subsections (1)(d) and (3)(b) of section 32B of the Public Treasury (Administration and Payments) Act 1969 (oversight of capital projects by Office of Project Management and Procurement) . . .” So, in this Bill it is basically taking away the oversight of this project from the Office of Project Management and Procurement. Could the Minister possibly elaborate as to what type of staffing plans may be with the Bermuda Airport Authority and what type of expertise may lie there to ensure that this is done? We understand all of what took place and the reason why we had the amendments to the Good Governance Act that came out of the review, I want to say was done by Pricew aterhouse, possibly, on procurement and government handli ng of such contracts. And I want to know what type of expertise will be lying in the Bermuda Airport
Bermuda House of Assembly Authority to all of a sudden take the power and strip the power away from the office of Project Management and Procurement. I can also move on to clause 6 to state just for the record as we have discussed in previous amend-ment which we will be seeing from the Progressive Labour Party in future clauses regarding the conferral of additional functions in clause 6 to the question as to conferring additional functions via a negative resolu-tion procedure as we are conferring functions in law itself in affirmative resolution of parliamentary scrutiny.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, Madam Chai rman, certainly the Authority has already established an organisational chart and the type of people who need to be employed there for the Authority to do its function and the qualifications that they require …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, Madam Chai rman, certainly the Authority has already established an organisational chart and the type of people who need to be employed there for the Authority to do its function and the qualifications that they require to do this job. I do not know what else you want me to say.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members who . . . the Chair recognises the Leader of the Opposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Absolutely I know what else I would like the Minister to say. Will the Minister be sharing that information with the House? I think it is something that is …
Are there any other Members who . . . the Chair recognises the Leader of the Opposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Absolutely I know what else I would like the Minister to say. Will the Minister be sharing that information with the House? I think it is something that is relevant. We are putting forward to set up an Airport Authority which is going to be governing things. These are things that I think should be shared with the people’s representatives, especially as they are moving forward with this Bill which I think this goes back to the very item when we are talking about, like a Blue Ribbon Panel, or other type of items as a way to make sure that people, MPs, are involved, and to make sure there is less confusion as to the way to move forward. So I think that information should be shared. I would appreciate if the Minister would give an undertaking to share that information. I am sure I would like to see it, and I am sure that Members in the other place would like to see it as well, especially if there are plans for this Airport Authority which we are currently discussing.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Airport Authority of course has a board, and we have already, I think, got staff, should I say, in train. But also the Authority will have . . . where there is a lack of staff …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Airport Authority of course has a board, and we have already, I think, got staff, should I say, in train. But also the Authority will have . . . where there is a lack of staff they will hire a consultant to do the job, particularly if those jobs are immediate and perhaps temporary, because there is a start-up phase. But I do not have an organisational chart or a description of each person that is going to work there. I do not. I think that is kind of unprec edented for us to have that sort of thing here.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clauses 3 through 7? The Chair recognises the Member for constituency 36. Hon. Michael J. Scott : Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would be grateful if the Minister would confirm the calculation or assessment by the Leader …
Thank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clauses 3 through 7? The Chair recognises the Member for constituency 36.
Hon. Michael J. Scott : Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would be grateful if the Minister would confirm the calculation or assessment by the Leader of the Opposition, and it is my question too. Does the Minister accept that clause 4 is excluding the jurisdic-tion of the Good Governance Act, really the Public Treasury (Administration and Payments) Act? Does he accept that this is the drive and purpose of claus e 4(1)(a), to exclude the applicability of the Good Governance provisions in Bermuda to this Authority? And if . . . first of all, I would like to have answer to that. And if the answer is in the affirmative, what is going to replace it?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, this is a quango, it is not part of central government. These things here are items that apply to central gover nment. So, the Treasury Act, all of it, the Treas ury A dministration Acts …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, this is a quango, it is not part of central government. These things here are items that apply to central gover nment. So, the Treasury Act, all of it, the Treas ury A dministration Acts . . . it is not going to be involved in any capital projects, so the Project Management and Procurement really does not count in any case. These things apply to central government and this is going to be a quango. It is going to operate its own affairs. We have it organised into two sections; one section for (let me see if I can decipher this) . . .
Hon. E. David Burt: Madam Chairman, if I may assist the Minister for one second, if he doesn’t mind . . . the statement that I said . . . earlier he said that he has an organisational chart, and I do not ask him to share it right now. What I am saying is if at some point in time he can provide that for the information of Members, I am not asking for him to go over it right now, as it is late. If I may just ask a particular question, because the Minister was talking about finances and quango and n ot . . . what is it called, because I think the Mini ster . . . we were speak ing specifically about the applicability of that section of the Public Treasury (Administration and Payments) Act. But as the Mini ster would be aware, Financial Instructions apply to organisations that receive government funds. And the Minister just said is that they handle their own affairs and the rules then do not appl y. I mean, they are getting public money, so we are going to assume that they are going to be held to the minimum standards of Financial Instructions r equire, insofar as tendering and otherwise. So I would hope that the because the Minister in his statements basically said they are not part of central government 616 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly so the rules that apply to central government will not apply to this quango. So I hope the Minister could possibly walk that back to give some comfort, but also I guess if the Minister could state as to whether or not in regard to their functions and obligations on this agreement, whether or not they will adhere to Fina ncial Instructions proper, whether or not they will have a separate set of financial instructions that will take place.
The Chairm an: Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: A quango, like many ot her quangos, will have its own set of financial instructions. I mean, I think that the quango will have two sections, one having to do with the retained services, and the other having to do with managing Skyport. But, insofar as I would say that the Public Treasury Act that applies to the quango, then I guess they will be subject to that. But insofar as these matters are concerned, that is kind of like where we are insofar as this is concerned.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clauses 3 through 7? There are no Members who would like to speak to clauses 3 through 7, so we will move clauses 3 through 7. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes. I would like to move …
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 3 through 7 be approved as printed. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clauses 3 through 7 passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clause 8. There are some amend-ments here.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any objections to that m otion? No objections. Please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 8 sets out the prerequisites, on the day of vesting, for the transfer of public lands. A plan of the Airport Lands is in Sche dule 1. AMENDMENTS TO CLAUSE 8 Hon. …
Are there any objections to that m otion? No objections. Please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 8 sets out the prerequisites, on the day of vesting, for the transfer of public lands. A plan of the Airport Lands is in Sche dule 1.
AMENDMENTS TO CLAUSE 8 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 8 should say: In clause 8(4)(a), delete and substitute “Schedule 1” wi th the words “Schedules 1 and 2.” Also, in clause 8, at the end insert the follo wing subsection “(5) Section 6 of the Statutory Instr uments Act of 1977 which provides that parliamentary scrutiny shall not apply to an order under subsection (3).”
The Chai rman: Thank you. Again, this is continuing on the amendments that we already have. Is there anyone who would like to speak to the amendments to clause 8? Is everyone in agreement with the amendments to clause 8? Everyone? And there is no objection to th e amendments to clause 8? Minister, please proceed.
[Gavel]
[Motion carried: Amendments to clause 8 passed.]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I would like to move clause 8, then.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clause 8 be approved as amended. No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clause 8 passed as amended.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I then want to move clauses 9, 10, and 11.
The ChairmanChairmanWe actually have an amendment for [clause] 11. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes. Clauses 9 and 10.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that we move clauses 9 and 10. Any objections to that motion? No objections, please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 9 sets out the assurances, between the Government of Bermuda and the Authority, relating to the Airport Lands. Clause 10 sets out the prerequisites …
It has been moved that we move clauses 9 and 10. Any objections to that motion? No objections, please proceed.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 9 sets out the assurances, between the Government of Bermuda and the Authority, relating to the Airport Lands. Clause 10 sets out the prerequisites by which the Authority may acquire land, an easement, an i nterest, or other right over land.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 9 and 10? Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Bermuda House of Assembly Regarding clause 10, section (3), where it says, “The Acquisition of Land Act 1970 shall apply to an acquisition of land under …
Thank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 9 and 10? Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Bermuda House of Assembly Regarding clause 10, section (3), where it says, “The Acquisition of Land Act 1970 shall apply to an acquisition of land under this section as if refer-ence to the Government therein is reference to the Authority.” And in that particular instance, having r eviewed the Acquisition of Land Act, I would ask . . . of course, the Minister has his lawyers here. I just want to be sure that any compulsory purchase of land by the Airport Authority will have to come to Parliament for approval. I just want to make sure that that is stat-ed and we get complete clarity on that particular mat-ter.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clauses 9 through 10? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 29. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. Now, the Minister did answer “yes” to that. My question would be, Where is …
The ChairmanChairmanIt is actually [clauses] 9 and 10, [clause 10, subsection](3). Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clauses 9 and 10? No? Minister, if you could move those two clauses. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I would like to move clauses 9 and 10 please.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 9 and 10 be approved as printed. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clauses 9 and 10 passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clause 11. There is an amendment here.
The ChairmanChairmanCorrect. AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 11 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: In clause 11, subsection (2)(e), delete the word “legislation” and substitute the phrase “provision of law”.
The ChairmanChairmanAgain, this is an extension of the amendments. Does anyone want to speak to the amendment to clause 11, which is revising (2)(e)? (I am just going to hold on.) [Inaudible interjection]
The ChairmanChairmanThat is okay, you can continue . . .
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberNo objection to this amendment.
The ChairmanChairmanNo objection. Fine, thank you. There is no objection to the amendment to clause 11, so are there any Members who would like to speak to clause 11, the amendment. No? It has been moved that clause 11 be approved as amended. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed …
The ChairmanChairmanPlease proceed, Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clause 12.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been proposed that we move clause 12. Any objection to that motion? Please proceed, Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 12 sets out the requirements for the leasing of Airport Lands to the Developer.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any Members that would like to speak to clause 12? There are no Members who would like to speak to clause 12. Minister, if you would— Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move that clause please.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clause 12 be approved as printed. Any objection to that motion. No objec t ion. Agreed to. [Gavel] 618 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly [Motion carried: Clause 12 passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister, please proceed. AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 13 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, clause 13, I would like to move that. There is an amendment here.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Again, the amendment is an extension to the amendments that you already in front of you. Please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes. In clause 13, in subsection (1), delete the word “legislation” and substitute the phrase “any other provision of law”.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any Members who would like to speak to the amendment to clause 13? There are no Members who would like to speak to the amendment to clause 13? Minister please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I would like to move that clause please.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clause 13 be [passed] as amended. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clause 13 passed as amended. ]
The ChairmanChairmanPlease proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I would like to move clauses 14, 15, and 16.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 14 through 16 be moved. Any objections? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: We have an amendment.
The ChairmanChairmanAh, sorry. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Right. There is a floor amendment to clause 14, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanYes, and there is another one. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, be my guest.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. OPPOSITION AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 14 Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I was trying to signal to you, because I did want to speak on clause 12, but the Minister of Home Affairs, it is my error. …
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition.
OPPOSITION AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 14 Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I was trying to signal to you, because I did want to speak on clause 12, but the Minister of Home Affairs, it is my error. I did not get the chance, and it has already gone, so I will just leave that part alone. Regarding clause 14, the amendment to clause 14, in clause 14 insert subsection (3) and i nsert into (3) that the interest register shall be posted on the Authority’s website. This is just the issue, of course, with the members of the Authority who are going to be regulating the Authority and in case there are any conflicts of interest, that interest has to be publicly able to be disclosed in the exact same way that our interest register is disclosed on our Parliament’s website. I put this amendment forward, and I understand that the Government will support it.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to the proposed amendment to clause 14? The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: We support that amendment, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. So, are there any other Members who would like to speak to the amended clause 14? No? Minister, if you would move it. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move clause 14, please as—
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clause 14 be approved as amended. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clause 14 passed as amended.] The Ch ai rman: Minister please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I would like to move clauses 15 and 16.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 15 and 16 be moved. Any objections to that motion? No objection, please proceed. Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 15 makes prov ision for the delegation of powers by the Board of the Authority. Clause 16 provides that all …
It has been moved that clauses 15 and 16 be moved. Any objections to that motion? No objection, please proceed.
Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 15 makes prov ision for the delegation of powers by the Board of the Authority. Clause 16 provides that all Directors, me mbers of staff and persons acting on behalf of the A uthority shall be immune from suit, prosecution or other proceedings, in respect of any act done or any omi ssion made, in good faith, in the execution or intended execution of any function performed in accordance with this Act.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I would like to move those two clauses.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 15 and 16? No? Minister, please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clauses 15 and 16. The Ch airman: It has been moved that clauses 15 and 16 be approved as printed. …
Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 15 and 16? No? Minister, please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clauses 15 and 16.
The Ch airman: It has been moved that clauses 15 and 16 be approved as printed. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel]
[Motion carried: Clauses 15 and 16 passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, at clause 17 we have an ame ndment. Clause 17 mandates that a Director, officer, employee, agent, advisor or member of staff of the Authority shall be bound by a duty of confidentiality. (We kind of referred to that earlier.)
AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 17
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: There is an amendment here, which states: “In clause 17(2)(e), after the words ‘lawfully made’ insert ‘to the Governor, the Minister, or’”.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Again, this is an extension to the amendments everyone should have in front of you. Would anyone like to speak to the amendment to clause 17?
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberNot to the amendment.
The ChairmanChairmanNot to the amendment? Okay. Thank you. There are no Members that . . . so we will move the amendment and then we will speak to the clause? It has been moved that the amendment to clause 17 be approved. No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Amendment to …
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any Members who would like to speak to clause 17? Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much. This, of course, Madam Chairman, is different from the issue we were discussing before, but this is talking about anyone of the Authority shall not reveal or disclose anything which …
Are there any Members who would like to speak to clause 17? Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much. This, of course, Madam Chairman, is different from the issue we were discussing before, but this is talking about anyone of the Authority shall not reveal or disclose anything which may take place. And if they do reveal what goes on, and they are subject to crim inal penalties, I guess the first thing is regarding the protection under the Employment Act, as amended, regarding whistle- blowers, if there is any particular issue with things which may need to be disclosed in the public interest. How are those two particular items reconciled? I mean, it seems rather intense for crim inal sanctions to be applied in respect to the operation of what was at one point in time a public asset.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, it has there “except as authorised or required by law.” So we are subject to other legislation that covers this, including whistle-blower, presumably.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 17? Yes, the Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. Thank you. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: This [clause] 17 we have here, this is something you would find with pos itions and whatever you agreed …
Thank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 17? Yes, the Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. Thank you. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: This [clause] 17 we have here, this is something you would find with pos itions and whatever you agreed is your job— The Chairman: Is your microphone on? Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: It’s late. This is not something you legislate. I mean, whatever happens wherever you work . . . this is sa ying you cannot say anything. You know, boy, this is a bit heavy -handed, I think.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Minister. 620 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: This is pretty standard for quangos, particularly quangos like the BMA. It is very much like that, where they are under . . . heavy - managed should we …
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, but something like this is normally in your terms of employment on the job, not in legislation. Because if somebody just comes out and says something to somebody who does not work there, then …
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, but something like this is normally in your terms of employment on the job, not in legislation. Because if somebody just comes out and says something to somebody who does not work there, then they are liable to be fined, what, $20,000, $50,000 on conviction. It is a criminal offence. When someone speaks about something that happens on the job or in a meeting, that is not crim inal. That is not criminal at all. You are making . . . this here is extra heavy -handed and I am certain this will go against ILO rules and regulations. This should be removed. It does not belong in legislation. You are making employees afraid to talk, and if they talk they are criminal by this law.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: This section is exactly like section 22 of the Bermuda Civil Aviation Authority. And I know from my BMA days, in the BMA Ac t they have this sort of confidentiality stuff too. So, lots of precedent …
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 17? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 36. Hon. Michael J. Scott : Madam Chairman, I am finding that I am in an incubator in this House and I wo nder if something can be done about …
Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 17? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 36. Hon. Michael J. Scott : Madam Chairman, I am finding that I am in an incubator in this House and I wo nder if something can be done about the temperature in here so that I do not get worse than I already am.
The ChairmanChairmanCertainly. I am not sure how — Hon. Michael J. Scott: A matter of privilege. [Laughter]
The ChairmanChairmanI don’t have the controls. [Inaudible interjections and laughter ]
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clause 17? And in the interim we will see what we can do about the air -conditioning. There are no other Members who would like to speak to the clause 17, Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to clause 17? And in the interim we will see what we can do about the air -conditioning. There are no other Members who would like to speak to the clause 17, Minister.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clause 17 as amended, please.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clause 17 be approved as amended. Any objection to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clause 17 passed as amended.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, can we move clauses 18 through 22?
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been proposed that we move clauses 18 through 22. Any objections to that motion? No objections, please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 18 mandates that the financial year of the Authority is the period of twelve months ending on the 31 st day or March in …
It has been proposed that we move clauses 18 through 22. Any objections to that motion? No objections, please proceed.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 18 mandates that the financial year of the Authority is the period of twelve months ending on the 31 st day or March in any year. Clause 19 mandates that the Authority shall submit to the Minister and the Minister of Finance, for their approval, income and expenditure budget est imates. Clause 20 sets out the composition of the A uthority’s funds, to be used in the performance of its functions. Clause 21 makes provision for the Minister, with the consent of the Minister of Finance, to make loans to the Authority. Clause 22 mandates that the Authority shall keep books of account and maintain proper records of its operations. Such records shall be audited by the Auditor General or such other auditor as may be a ppointed by the Auditor General.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 18 through 22? The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Madam Chairman. In regard to clause 19, during the general d ebate the Minister of Finance had given an …
Thank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 18 through 22? The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Madam Chairman. In regard to clause 19, during the general d ebate the Minister of Finance had given an indication that there may be an adjustment from the quango fi gure of $3.5 million, which was given to us by CIBC last week. Does the Minister have any type of update as to the expenses of the quango ongoing and their budget therein?
Bermuda House of Assembly The Chairman: Again, we have to . . . while I understand and you did mention it in general debate, we are not in general debate any more, we are in Committee. I look for the Minister.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I have that information. We are looking at about $2 million now, instead of $3.5 [million]. So, we have pared it back somewhat.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: [Microphone not on] In [clause] 21 it says the Minister may make loans to the Authority. But how is the Authority [INAUDIBLE]
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: There may be revenue streams. I think at first we are doing grants. (Aren’t we at first?) [Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes. At first we are ma king grants to the Authority. But in …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: There may be revenue streams. I think at first we are doing grants. (Aren’t we at first?)
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes. At first we are ma king grants to the Authority. But in the future they may have revenues from air traffic control of flights over Bermuda, and that sort of thing that will be under the purview of the Bermuda Airport Authority. I mean, you guys were working on the same thing when you were Gove rnment. We have made one or two baby steps toward that. So, there is still a possibility that they will have revenues. So that is where this helps.
Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Thank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5.
Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: I thought that comes under aviation which you had moved out of the Airport. Did I get that right, or what?
[Crosstalk ]
The ChairmanChairmanDo you want . . . I think people would like to hear the answer. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, it definitely comes under the Authority.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clauses 18 through 22? There are no other Members who would like to speak to clauses 18 through 22, Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards : Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would like to move [clauses] 18 …
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 18 through 33 be approved as printed. Any objection to that Motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clauses 18 through 22 passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clauses 23 through 29.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 23 through 29 be moved. Any objection to that motion? Please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) R ichards: Clause 23 sets out the conditions by which the Authority shall submit to the Minister an annual report. Clause 24 sets out the means by which …
It has been moved that clauses 23 through 29 be moved. Any objection to that motion? Please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) R ichards: Clause 23 sets out the conditions by which the Authority shall submit to the Minister an annual report. Clause 24 sets out the means by which the Authority shall appoint and employ staff members. Clause 25 sets out the means by which the Board of the Authority shall appoint and employ a Chief Executive Officer. Clause 26 sets out the manner in which employees of the Department of Airport Operations offi cers are to be transferred to alternative employment. Clause 27 mandates that the Authority shall comply with the provisions of the National Pension Scheme (Occupational Pensions) Act 1998. Clause 28 affirms the application of the prov isions of the Health Insurance Act 1970 to the Author ity. Clause 29 binds the Crown to the provisions of this Act, clarifies the status of the Authority, and sets out the Authority’s exemptions from certain taxes.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 23 through 29? The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you. Regarding clause 26, transfer of Airport Operations officers to alternative employment, would the Minister be able to give …
Thank you, Member. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 23 through 29? The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you. Regarding clause 26, transfer of Airport Operations officers to alternative employment, would the Minister be able to give any indication as to the persons that will be transferred . . . not the persons, the positions which will be transferred from the Depar tment of Airport Operations, the number of persons, names of positions? I mean, if you share the infor-mation it would just be helpful. Like, we literally have nothing and that is, what we said from before, it is just 622 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly part of the problem. We are just operating in the dark, and it would save us if we just had, you know, information, this is the Authority, [and] this is what we are doing. That might be helpful.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minis ter. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: There are two staff me mbers, both going from DAO [Department of Airport Operations] to the Bermuda Airport Authority.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, I appreciate that. And I will refer to the clause so I do not get shouted at by the Chairman. I will refer to the clause insofar as clause 24, regarding the appointment …
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, I appreciate that. And I will refer to the clause so I do not get shouted at by the Chairman. I will refer to the clause insofar as clause 24, regarding the appointment of staff. The Minister said that he may already have some staff that are in place and/or identified. Would the Minister be able to give the total number of staffing numbers, see-ing that there are only two persons transferred? What would be the total number of staffing envisioned at the Authority at this time?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: On the staffing and —
The ChairmanChairmanOn [clause] 26? Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, I am looking at [clause] 26. Will the staff that work there who are unionized, will the union coordinate the move with them?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Member for constituency 13. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Could I answer that last question? It’s so late, I’m sure I will forget, so let’s say it now. There are five positions lined up, but subject to board approval, of government staff, …
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Member for constituency 13. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Could I answer that last question? It’s so late, I’m sure I will forget, so let’s say it now. There are five positions lined up, but subject to board approval, of government staff, that is. But to answer your question, Honourable Member Burgess, on the microphone, that yes, they will continue to have their union affiliation both in the Airport Authority as well as in Skyport.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. And now the Chair recognises the Member for constituency 13.
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainThank you, Madam Chai rman. This could be a typo in clause 23(1)(c). It is listed as “Ministers” plural. And in 23(2) it says “Minis-ter.” I am just looking for some clarity for that.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, very much. That would be clause 23(1). [Crosstalk]
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, the Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It should be “Minister.” [Crosstalk ] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: There are two substantive Ministers, the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Finance. Those are two Ministers .
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Leader of the Opposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you. The Minister would know, and I am sure his lawyer will clarify that “Ministers” plural and capitalised, I am sure the Attorney General will say there is no definition that applies there, and if it is …
The Chair recognises the Leader of the Opposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you. The Minister would know, and I am sure his lawyer will clarify that “Ministers” plural and capitalised, I am sure the Attorney General will say there is no definition that applies there, and if it is meant to be the two Ministers it will probably want to be reworded as it is in clause 19, where it says “Minister of F inance” and “the Minister.” If that is the view for that particular clause, that would actually have to be amended to state that.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: For ten to four o’clock in the morning, you have a very sharp eye, Honourable Member. It should be “Minister.”
The ChairmanChairmanSo, has it been agreed that for clause 23 we do not need to have it in writing, but we can change the— Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It should be “Minister” in both places.
The ChairmanChairmanIt should be “Minister,” singular, in both places in clause 23. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any objections to that change? There are no objections to that change. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clauses 23 through 29? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 29. Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes, Minister, with …
Are there any objections to that change? There are no objections to that change. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clauses 23 through 29? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 29.
Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes, Minister, with regard to [clause] 26, and the transferring of employees from one section to another, or maybe another section in the Authority, or another government department, have you been given any indication yet as to if any of those employees do not wish to continue on, and wish to move?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I know of one person who I think is going to come to government, i.e., and not to the Authority, and is coming to central gover nment. (Is there more than one?) One person. So, of the …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I know of one person who I think is going to come to government, i.e., and not to the Authority, and is coming to central gover nment. (Is there more than one?) One person. So, of the people who were at DAO, those that I told you are going to the Authority. And the rest are going to go to Skyport, except for one who is going to come to government.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are th ere any other Members who would like to speak to clauses 23 through 29? No other Members. Minister, if we could move clauses 23 through 29 as amended. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move those clauses 23 through 29, please.
The ChairmanChairmanThan you. It has been moved that clauses 23 through 29 be approved as amended. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clauses 23 through 29 passed with typographical error corrected in clause 23.]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister, please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move clauses 30 and 31.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 30 and 31 be moved. I believe I have an amendment for clause 30 in front of me, so we might just want to do clause 30, preferably. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any objections to— Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Government does not support that. The Chairman: That’s fine, but I still have to put it out. Thank you, very much. So if the Leader of the Opposition would read out your proposed clause. OPPOSITION AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 30 …
Are there any objections to— Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Government does not support that. The Chairman: That’s fine, but I still have to put it out. Thank you, very much. So if the Leader of the Opposition would read out your proposed clause.
OPPOSITION AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 30
Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Regarding clause 30, the amendment is in clause 30(2)(b), delete from the clause the statement which reads, “but such publication shall not be subject to the Statutory Instruments Act 1977. ” This is regarding the Airport fees. What this is basically saying is that the fees that are mention ed in subsection (1), all amendments to such fees be published in the Gazette and posted on the Authority’s website, but in no way, shape or form require any type of parliamentary scrutiny, whether it be affirmative resolution or negative resolution. And we believe that this should, at least, come to Parliament as we are dealing with the setting of fees and that is the reason why we have put forward this amendment, because we believe that parliamentary scrutiny should apply in some way, shape, form, or fashion, especially in the setting of fees.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to the amendment to clause 30? There are no other Members. We have heard from the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, Madam Cha irman. We do not support this. These fees need to get approved and …
Thank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to the amendment to clause 30? There are no other Members. We have heard from the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, Madam Cha irman. We do not support this. These fees need to get approved and we cannot wait for the House. I think this one actually breaches the agreement as well. So, we have got to have certainty for fees in the Project Agreement. So, we cannot have them subject to being changed, vetoed, or whatever in the House. So, we do not support that amendment.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to the proposed amendment? The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you. I understand that the Minister said in his statement that we cannot wait for the House. But under a negative …
Thank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to the proposed amendment? The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition.
Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you. I understand that the Minister said in his statement that we cannot wait for the House. But under a negative resolution procedure, because the Government does not support our amendment to clause [30](2) on a negative resolution procedure, there would be no waiting for the House. The Minister could make the order; but at least it would still come to the Parliament for some type of scrutiny. But I think, if I may, Madam Chairman, that this is something that is important, because as the Minister said, if we change this it might violate the 624 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Agreement. I think it is important. The Minister bas ically said that the fees are there and there has to be fee certainty and the fees will continue to increase without any type of parliamentary scrutiny. So, I think it is important that we know we are basically in this Act giving up our ability to set fees at the airport, and that is what the Minister is asking us to agree to. And we believe that is something that should remain here, in Parliament.
The Ch airman: Thank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to the amendment? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 24 [sic] . Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thank you, Madam Chairman. It seems just fundamental that even if the proposit ion is correct, and I do not believe it is, that fees need to be . . . will be increased. The private ent ity, surely, is going to have to publish them to its cl ients and customers somehow. So, why not publish them officially?
[Crosstalk ]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It is the role of the A uthority to approve these fees. I mean, that is the A uthority’s job under the structure. It is not Parliament, but the Authority. So we have to have . . . these fees have to have a …
Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It is the role of the A uthority to approve these fees. I mean, that is the A uthority’s job under the structure. It is not Parliament, but the Authority. So we have to have . . . these fees have to have a certain amount of certainty for this model to work. So we do not support the amendment.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to the proposed amendment? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 29. Hon. Zane J. S. De S ilva: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. I hear what the Minister says. In the Project Agreement it calls for —
The ChairmanChairmanMember, we are referring to the Bill. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes, and in it , it says the Airport fees.
The ChairmanChairmanIn the Bill, and that is what we are talking to. Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Like I said, I am replying to what the Minister said, and what he referred to, i.e., the Agreement, and what is in the Agreement. And they conflict and the changing of this …
In the Bill, and that is what we are talking to.
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Like I said, I am replying to what the Minister said, and what he referred to, i.e., the Agreement, and what is in the Agreement. And they conflict and the changing of this would make that a challenge for him. My question to the Minister is, in the Agre ement it calls for a rate of inflation increase every year, as a minimum. It also says that fees . . . an application can be made to the Authority for an increase over the rate of inflation, in the Project Agreement. My question is, If they request an increase over the rate of inflation, will you be bringing that here to the House?
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Authority has the authority to increase fees over and above the rate of inflation upon application by Skyport. Skyport cannot do that on its own. It has to get prior approval from the Authority. That is one of the …
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to the amendment? There are no other Members who would like to speak to the amendment? Then we need to vote on the amendment. I am just putting that back out, I know it is early in the …
Thank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to the amendment? There are no other Members who would like to speak to the amendment? Then we need to vote on the amendment. I am just putting that back out, I know it is early in the morning. So, we will vote on the amendment before us, and the amendment reads (and this is an Opposition amendment to clause 30). It currently includes the line “but such publication shall not be subject to the Statutory Instruments Act 1977.” The proposed amendment is to delete that line, co rrect? Everyone has that in front of them? All those in favour of the amendment, say Aye.
AYES.
The ChairmanChairmanAll those not in favour of the amendment, say Nay. NAYS.
The ChairmanChairmanI believe the Nays have it. [Inaudible interjections]
The ChairmanChairmanI did. Yes, they did stand up. [Inaudible interjections]
The ChairmanChairmanThe Nays have it. Thank you. We are going to move on to clause 31 please. [Motion failed: Proposed amendment to clause 30 not passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman— [Inaudible interjections]
The ChairmanChairmanI would prefer not to hear the Oppos ition Whip. Bermuda House of Assembly Excuse me? Excuse me? Member, would you like to be removed?
The ChairmanChairmanNo, I am just asking a question. Thank you, very much. I would prefer not to hear. Thank you. Please proceed, clause 30. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clause 31— The Chairman: No, we are going to move . . . are there …
No, I am just asking a question. Thank you, very much. I would prefer not to hear. Thank you. Please proceed, clause 30. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clause 31— The Chairman: No, we are going to move . . . are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 30 as it stands? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Leader of the Opposition.
Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much. Regarding this part of the Bill, Madam Chairman, we just had the discussion, and I just want Members, because we know that, and we have seen that certain Members of the Government Benches may not actually be aware of the provisions of this Agreement as the Members of the Opposition are, but long story short is that in passing this Bill we are r emoving the power of Parliament to set the fees at the airport and this is something that is to move and set as part of the Bill and that is not something we believe should reside in an Authority that is appointed solely and strictly by the Minister. We believe that some of that should continue to remain with the power of Par-liament.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 30? There are no other Members, Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I would like to move clause 30 please.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clause 30 be approved as printed. Any objections to that motion? Are there no objections to that motion? There is an objection to the motion, so we will have to put a vote to the floor again. So, we are putting to the floor the …
It has been moved that clause 30 be approved as printed. Any objections to that motion? Are there no objections to that motion? There is an objection to the motion, so we will have to put a vote to the floor again. So, we are putting to the floor the vote to accept clause 30, which is titled “Airport fees” on the Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017 (as amended). Are there any objections to that motion?
The ChairmanChairmanThose in favour, say Yes. AYES.
The ChairmanChairmanAnd those not in favour, say Nay. NAYS.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Ayes have it. Let us proceed. So we move that clause 30 be approved as printed. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clause 30 passed without amen dment.]
The ChairmanChairmanPlease proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clause 31.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has proposed that clause 31 be moved. No objection to that motion. Minister please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you. Clause 31 gives effect to the savings and transitional provisions in Schedule 3.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clause 31? There are no Members who would like to speak to clause 31, Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Then I move that clause 31 be approved.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clause 31 be approved as printed. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clause 31 passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clause 32 as amended.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clause 32 be approved as amended. Any objections to that? No? Would you like to speak to the amendment to clause 32, Minister? So we will do one at a time. 626 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly Minister, there are …
It has been moved that clause 32 be approved as amended. Any objections to that? No? Would you like to speak to the amendment to clause 32, Minister? So we will do one at a time. 626 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Minister, there are two proposed amendments. I am now looking at the Government’s pr oposed amendment to clause 32. And then we will look at the other amendment, if that is agreeable to the House. That is agreeable. Minister, please proceed.
AMENDMENTS TO CLAUSE 32
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, first of all, clause 32 provides for regulations under the Act to be subject to the negative resolution procedure, and gives the Mi nister power to make consequential amendments. The amendment we are looking at in clause is to section 32(2)(a), delete the word “law” and subst itute the word “Act”.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any Members who would like to speak to the amendment to clause 32, the Government amendment? There are no Members who would like to speak to the Government’s amendment, so we will approve clause 32 with a Government amendment, but go back to look at the next amendment. …
Are there any Members who would like to speak to the amendment to clause 32, the Government amendment? There are no Members who would like to speak to the Government’s amendment, so we will approve clause 32 with a Government amendment, but go back to look at the next amendment. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel]
[Motion carried: Government amendment to clause 2 passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanThe other amendment we have to clause 32 is presented by the Opposition. Would you read out your [amendment] please? Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Madam Chairman. The amendment to clause 32 is in regard to the deletion of subsection (3) which gives blanket negative resolution procedure to this …
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Are there any Members who would like to speak to the Opposition’s amendment to clause 32? The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: We do not support that amendment, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any other Members who would like to speak to the Opposition’s amendment? If not we will put it to the vote. Those who agree to the Opposition’s amendment to clause 32, which would be to delete subsec-tion (3), say Aye. AYES.
The ChairmanChairmanThose not in favour, say Nay. NAYS.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Nays have it. Please proceed. [Motion failed: Opposition’s amendment to clause 32 failed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I move that clause 32 be approved with the [Gover nment’s] amendment as printed here— The Chairman: It has been moved that clause 32 be approved as amended by …
The Nays have it. Please proceed.
[Motion failed: Opposition’s amendment to clause 32 failed.]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I move that clause 32 be approved with the [Gover nment’s] amendment as printed here— The Chairman: It has been moved that clause 32 be approved as amended by the Government’s amendment. Any objections to that motion. No objections. Agreed to.
[Gavel] [Motion carried: Clause 32 passed as amended by Government .]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I move clause 33.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any objections to moving clause 33? Minister please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 33 is the commencement provision. The amendments are as follows: AMENDMENTS TO CLAUSE 33 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Bill entitled the Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017 be amended by deleting and …
Are there any objections to moving clause 33? Minister please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 33 is the commencement provision. The amendments are as follows:
AMENDMENTS TO CLAUSE 33
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Bill entitled the Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017 be amended by deleting and substituting the current words “Schedule 2” in [clause] 2 in the definition for “Secretary”; in [clause] 13(4) where they appear; and in the Schedule [2] heading “CONSTITUTION AND PROCEEDING OF BOARD” w ith the words “Schedule 3”. By deleting and substituting the current words “Schedule 3” in [clause] 31 with the words “Schedule 4”; and inserting the new “Schedule 2”. These are sort of consequential amendments to things we have done before.
The ChairmanChairmanOh, okay. I am just getting it. I did not have it in front of me. Are there any Members who would like to speak to the amendment to clause 33? Bermuda House of Assembly There are no Members who would like to speak to the clause. Hon. E. T. …
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clause 33 be approved as amended. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clause 33 passed as amended.]
The ChairmanChairmanPlease proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I move that all clauses be approved and reported to the House.
The ChairmanChairmanNo, we are going to go back to clause 2. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Schedules.
The ChairmanChairmanAll right, Schedules. It has been moved that Schedules 1 and 2 be approved as printed. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections to that motion? We are talking about the Schedules. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes.
The ChairmanChairmanAh, all right. So we are just going to do Schedule 2. Are there any Members who would like to speak to this Schedule 2 amendment? The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. AMENDMENT TO SCHEDULE 2 Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Madam Chairman. The amendment is …
Ah, all right. So we are just going to do Schedule 2. Are there any Members who would like to speak to this Schedule 2 amendment? The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition.
AMENDMENT TO SCHEDULE 2
Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Madam Chairman. The amendment is to [paragraph] 1 of Schedule 2, subsection (1)(b) before the period insert “and the Opposition Leader” as the Airport Authority is an Authority to regulate the operations of Skyport, similar to the other appointments which are done on a bipar-tisan basis, such as the Regulatory Authority, PATI commissioner, and lots of other committees, Information Commissioner. . . sorry, the Personal Information Commissioner, et cetera. The consultation with the Governor and the Opposition Leader insofar as the appointment to this regulatory body. So, from that position it was thought that it should be something that at least has a consultation, understanding that the Minister always makes the final decision, and that is the reason that it was put forward.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to the proposed Opposition amendment to Schedule 2(1)? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, the Government does not support that amendment.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Since the Government does not support that amendment, the Chair recognises the Leader of the Opposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much. I have given my reasons as to why. Would the Minister like to explain to myself and the people who are actually listening at …
Thank you. Since the Government does not support that amendment, the Chair recognises the Leader of the Opposition.
Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, very much. I have given my reasons as to why. Would the Minister like to explain to myself and the people who are actually listening at 4:00 am as to the reason why the Government does not support the amendment? There are quite a few people listening.
The ChairmanChairmanI give it to the Minister to respond. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: We do not think it is appropriate in this case.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. We will put the proposed Opposition amendment to a vote. The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: I understand the Minister’s time is short. Can the Minister possibly explain or elaborate why the Government does not think it is appropriate, whereas in …
Thank you. We will put the proposed Opposition amendment to a vote. The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: I understand the Minister’s time is short. Can the Minister possibly explain or elaborate why the Government does not think it is appropriate, whereas in other such regulatory authorities and over-sight bodies there is bipartisan, or at least consultation with the Opposition?
The ChairmanChairmanI believe the answer has already been received. [Inaudible interjection]
The ChairmanChairmanWould you like to have . . . absolutely I will allow him. Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: There are regulatory authorities, particularly BMA, that do not have that. So we are modelling off that.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you for elaborating, Minister. We will put the [Opposition’s proposed amendment] to a vote. 628 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly Those in favour of the Opposition amendment to Schedule 2(1), say Aye. AYES.
The ChairmanChairmanThose not in favour, say Nay. NAYS.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Nays have it. [Motion failed: Opposition amendment to Schedule 2(1) not passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister, please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move all clauses and Schedules.
The ChairmanChairmanI believe we are going to go back to clause 2. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Oh yes, I keep forgetting that.
The ChairmanChairmanThat’s all right. And the Chair will now recognise the Minister from constituency 23, I believe you were going to look for . . . CLAUSE 2 RECOMMITTED Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes, Madam Chairman, thank you. I just wish to refer to the interpretation, the Agreement. The Opposition …
That’s all right. And the Chair will now recognise the Minister from constituency 23, I believe you were going to look for . . .
CLAUSE 2 RECOMMITTED
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes, Madam Chairman, thank you. I just wish to refer to the interpretation, the Agreement. The Opposition had issue with the Project Agreement with respect to the profession and training, number of hours in classroom training that were r equired under the Project Agreement, and I just wanted to make sure the House was made aware that I have not been able to open, as a result of it being archived. I would have to get it off of my computer. So what I would like to do, because this is for the Project Agreement, not for the Bill —
The ChairmanChairmanThat is correct. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I think it is i mportant for me to be able to speak to that, and I will ensure that the Opposition is in possession of the in-formation as it is being finalised by agreement with Aecon. So I just want to …
That is correct.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I think it is i mportant for me to be able to speak to that, and I will ensure that the Opposition is in possession of the in-formation as it is being finalised by agreement with Aecon. So I just want to make sure, because I do not want to have a situation in which we may find that the requirements for classroom training and training is unattainable. That does not make any sense. So I will make sure that the Opposition is apprised of any amendments that will be made to the Project Agree-ment —not to this. But this refers to the Project Agreement and I think it is important that I acknowledge that.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Not to belabour the point, it is, of course, inside of the Project Agreement, it is the Bermudian Labour Plan, so, of course, and lots of people have seen it. One would hope that the …
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition.
Hon. E. David Burt: Not to belabour the point, it is, of course, inside of the Project Agreement, it is the Bermudian Labour Plan, so, of course, and lots of people have seen it. One would hope that the Department of Workforce Development is working towards it, and the resources are being given. And I encourage the Mini ster to ensure that this information is given to the other place when they look at this on Wednesday, so that the same questions do not arise. My Members do have a copy of this and they will ask the same ques-tions because we want to make sure that Bermudians have the opportunity for these jobs.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you very much. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I will certainly make that undertaking.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you very much. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to clause 2? If no other Members wish to speak to clause 2, Minister . . . Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I move clause 2.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clause 2 be approved— Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: As amended.
The ChairmanChairman—as amended. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clause 2 passed as amended.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: So, we move all clauses and Schedules be approved and report it to the House.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that all clauses . . . the Bill be approved with amendments. Any objections to that motion? [Inaudible interjection] Bermuda House of Assembly The Chairman: There is an objection, so we will call for votes. All those in favour say, Aye. AYES. The Chair man: All …
It has been moved that all clauses . . . the Bill be approved with amendments. Any objections to that motion?
[Inaudible interjection]
Bermuda House of Assembly The Chairman: There is an objection, so we will call for votes. All those in favour say, Aye. AYES. The Chair man: All those not in favour, say Nay. NAYS. The Chai rman: The Ayes have it. I do like that bobbing, but I have three. Thank you. More than three individuals have stood up (maybe at different times), so that means we will call for names. I will ring the bell and make sure that the doors are locked. I do believe that we will follow pol icy. [Pause for the ringing of the bells] The Chai rman: The motion is in favour of the Bill, as amended, Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017. We will be voting on . . . yes, I am just telling everyone what we are actually doing. [Pause] The Chai rman: Thank you, very much. The three minutes have gone by, so we will now . . . everyone is seated. We will now have a vote, as three individuals have stood. So, we were moving the Bill entitled, Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017, as amended. We will just call for names. Thank you. The Depu ty Clerk: DIVISION [Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017, clauses 1 through 33 and Schedules as amended] Ayes: 1 8 Nays: 16 Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden Mr. Walton Brown Hon. Kenneth Bascome Hon. D. V. Burgess, Sr. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier Hon. E. David Burt Mr. Shawn G. Crockwell Mr. Rolfe Commissiong Hon. Michael H. Dunkley Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva Hon. P. J. Gordon-Pamplin Ms. Lovitta F. Foggo Hon. Dr. E. Grant Gibbons Hon. Wayne L. Furbert Ms. Susan E. Jackson Hon. Dennis P. Lister Hon. Trevor G. Moniz Mr. Diallo V. S. Rabain Mrs. Nandi Outerbridge Mr. Walter H. Roban Mr. Mark J. Pettingill Hon. Michael J. Scott Hon. E. T. Richards Mr. W. Law rence Scott Hon. S. D. Richards, Jr. Mr. Jamahl S. Simmons Ms. Leah K. Scott Mr. Neville S. Tyrrell Hon. R. Wayne Scott Mr. Michael A. Weeks Hon. N. H. Cole Simons Ms. Kim N. Wilson
Mr. Glen Smith
Mr. Jeff Sousa The ChairmanThank you very much. The vote has been tallied. There are 18 Ayes, and 16 Noes. So the Ayes have it. [Agreed by majority on division: Clauses 1 through 33 and all Schedules to t he Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017 passed as amended.] The Chair man: Minister, I ask …
Thank you very much. The vote has been tallied. There are 18 Ayes, and 16 Noes. So the Ayes have it. [Agreed by majority on division: Clauses 1 through 33 and all Schedules to t he Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017 passed as amended.] The Chair man: Minister, I ask you to proceed. We still have to go through the Preamble. Hon. E. T . (Bob) Richards: I ask that the Bill be r eported to the House as amended. The Chair man: It has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House as amended. No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion car ried: Clauses 1 through 33 passed as amended.] The Chair man: We must also move the Schedules and the Preamble. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move the Schedules and the Preamble. The Chai rman: It has been moved that the Preamble be approved —I am just doing it officially for the paper. And it has been moved that the Schedules be approved. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion c arried: Preamble and Schedules passed as amended.] [Motion car ried: The Bermuda Airports Authority Act 2017 was considered by a Committee of the whole House and passed with amendments. ] House resum ed at 4:20 am [Saturday, 11 February 2017] [Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair] Hon. De rrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Mr. Speaker, before we start, may I ask something?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes. Hon. De rrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Mr. Speaker, it has been almost 12 hours since we had food. That there is some stipulation in the ILO [International Labour O rganization] rules about serving meals. I think we 630 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly should …
Yes. Hon. De rrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Mr. Speaker, it has been almost 12 hours since we had food. That there is some stipulation in the ILO [International Labour O rganization] rules about serving meals. I think we 630 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly should adjourn this until next Friday, because we ca nnot be asked to serve with no food in your stomach for 12 hours. You know? I mean, we should not be trea ting ourselves like this.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right, thank you, Honourable Member. I do appreciate your point. REPORT OF COMMITTEE BERMUDA AIRPORT AUTHORITY ACT 2017
The SpeakerThe SpeakerFirst of all, the Second Reading of the Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017 has been ap-proved with amendments. SPEAKER’S RULING [Bermuda Constitution 39(1)]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAnd just before we move on, I would like to bring Members’ attention to the fact that this particular Bill does not require the Governor’s recommendation signify, because this Bill, according to section 39 of the Constitution does not satisfy the r equirements for a money Bill. And I will, …
And just before we move on, I would like to bring Members’ attention to the fact that this particular Bill does not require the Governor’s recommendation signify, because this Bill, according to section 39 of the Constitution does not satisfy the r equirements for a money Bill. And I will, just to bring clarity to that, section 39[(1)] says, “‘ money bill ’ means a public bill which, in the opinion of the Speaker, con-tains only provisions dealing with all or any of the following matters, that is to say — (a) the imposition, r epeal, remission, alteration or regulation of taxation; (b) the imposition, for the payment of debt or other financial purposes, of charges on public money, or the variation or repeal of any such charges; (c) the grant of money to the Crown or to any authority or person, or the variation or revocation of any such grant; (d) the appropriation, receipt, custody, investment, issue or audit of accounts of public money; (e) the raising or guarantee of any loan or the repayment thereof, or the establishment, alteration, administration or abolition of any sinking fund provided in connection with any such loan; or (f) subordinate matters incidental to any of the matters ” that I have just said. And it is clear that this Bill deals significantly with administrative matters, the setting up of the A uthority in terms of the principal functions, the general powers, the board of directors, the staffing, transfer of duty officers, and the like, which clearly indicates that this Bill is more than just dealing with financial mat-ters. So, the matter is not a money Bill.
Hon. E. T. (Bo b) Richards: Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes sir? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I believe this Bill is a f inancial Bill under the Constitution.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIt is a financial Bill, but it is not a money Bill. I have made my ruling. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes. I agree with that, sir.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAnd while we . . . just to save time, I might as well do the next Bill as well, in the same r egard, that that Bill is not a money Bill. In fact, that was easier to determine that it was not a money Bill. I am sorry …
And while we . . . just to save time, I might as well do the next Bill as well, in the same r egard, that that Bill is not a money Bill. In fact, that was easier to determine that it was not a money Bill. I am sorry that it came on the Order Paper as if it were. In fact, I believe the Finan-cial Secretary has sent an e- mail to my office some time ago. I did not see the e- mail, although it was co pied to me, where he indicated that it was a money Bill. But in essence, it is the Speaker who determines that. We now move on to the next order. Do not beat me up, MP Burgess, all right? I have been to the ILO too, don’t send me there. Carry on please.
BILL
SECOND READING
AIRPORT REDEVELOPMENT CONCESSION ACT 2017
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker, I move that the Bill entitled the Airport Redevelopment Conces-sion Act 2016 (we will change that to 2017), under the Governor’s recommendation, be now read a second time. I guess it is not under the Governor’s recom-mendation because it is not a money Bill, right?
The SpeakerThe SpeakerRight. Exactly. It is definitely not a money Bill. That one is a straightforward Bill. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Right. In doing so, Mr. Speaker, this Bill now before the House is the Airport Redevelopment Concession Act. The purpose of the Bill is to grant certain permi ssions, concessions, …
Right. Exactly. It is definitely not a money Bill. That one is a straightforward Bill. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Right. In doing so, Mr. Speaker, this Bill now before the House is the Airport Redevelopment Concession Act. The purpose of the Bill is to grant certain permi ssions, concessions, and exemptions to facilitate and assist with the redevelopment of the L. F. Wade Inter-national Airport to the Developer and other specified entities involved with the redevelopment. Mr. Speaker, Honourable Members have a lready discussed at length, I would say at great length and in depth, various aspects of the redevelopment of Bermuda’s airport, including rationale, structure, obl igations, and costs. I have no intention of rehashing those matters here now. This Bill before us now is a consequence of the structure of the Agreement which is in the form of a partnership, a public/private partnership, or P3. For any partnership to work, each partner must make a contribution and each partner should receive a bene-fit. This Bill is a manifestation of one of the contributions that the Government will be making to the pr oject to make it economically viable. Specifically, the
Bermuda House of Assembly contributions are relief from customs duty, taxes, and other miscellaneous fees. This Bill deals with those matters. Honourable Members will be aware that the Government routinely gives tax concessions to foreign entities who bring foreign capital to Bermuda to invest. Such inward direct investment enriches our country and our people through employment and business opportunities. This Bill is very similar in its effect. Ber-muda Skyport Corporation Limited (or Skyport) is the entity which will be raising both equity and debt capital abroad to design, construct, and operate the Bermuda Airport. Skyport will be at least 32 per cent owned by Aecon Inc ., which is the other equity investor, the ot her equity investors being institutional investors. Ther efore, it is logical for Skyport to be treated as though it were an overseas investor in a Bermuda hotel proper-ty, or like Government itself. It would be clearly nonsensical for Government to essentially levy taxes on itself. The tax relief provided by this Bill will lower the cost of the project thus sheltering passengers from even higher fees. Mr. Speaker, it is important to note that the revenue foregone by this Bill is zero, as they would never have materialised without this project. In fact, even if the airport were procured using the traditional procurement method, the relief would still have to be provided. It would have made little financial sense for Government to charge customs duties and other taxes on a Government project. What this would do, Mr. Speaker, is drive the cost of the project up, resulting in government paying more. Mr. Speaker, this Bill provides the certainty that investors seek when investing in a foreign juri sdiction and provides for the following: (a) Relief from customs duty on capital goods similar to the relief provided for the KEMH redevelopment project. (b) Relief of stamp duty, landholding and land taxes. If Government was procuring this project there would be none of these taxes due. (c) Assurance that if Bermuda implemented income tax, service tax, or a value- added tax, the parties developing the project would be exempt. (d) Exempted from employer’s share of pa yroll tax for work on the construction of the project. If Government procured the pr oject the same relief would have been giv-en. (e) Exemption from the employer’s share of payroll tax for Skyport while operating the airport. If the Department of Airport Operations were operating the airport, the pa yroll tax would be the same. (f) Exemption from foreign currency pur-chase tax for transactions relating to the project. Again, if Government procured the project, the same relief would apply. (g) Exemption from work permit fees. Mr. Speaker, the Bill also provides for certain environmental exemptions in relation to pre- existing contamination. The exemptions to be granted to the exempted parties from all environmental legislation in respect of pre- existing contamination is necessary to implement the agreements regarding pre- existing e nvironmental contamination negotiating. Skyport is be-ing asked to assume operational and control of a brown field site. Skyport and its investors and contractors are justifiably concerned that they may be exposed to liability as party in control of contamination. Typically, this type of situation is addressed by the government’s sponsor of a project agreeing to step up and remediate any pre- environmental contamination that may be identified as and when identified. In this case, however, the Government of Bermuda recognises that the airport lands are very large, have a his-tory of military use and, as a result, by Governm ent stepping in to remediate every identified issue could become cost prohibitive. As the airport lands are not publicly access ible, the approach taken by the Agreement limits the Government’s obligation to step in to remediate to only those circumstances where there was some identifiable risk to people or the environment, and to allow the Government to not step in where the pre- existing contamination poses no threat. The Government’s prudent view was that sleeping dogs should be allowed to lie undisturbe d until such time as they pose some risk to people or the environment. The Government has negotiated an extensive protocol for the identification, assessment and, if nec-essary, remediation of pre- existing environmental co ntamination in the Project Agreement. When pre-existing contamination is identified that is not an ac-ceptable risk, the Government will fund prudent rem ediation. To make this effective, the Bill proposes to exempt Skyport as investors and contractors from lia-bility, but only subject to their continued compliance with the terms of the Project Agreement. Skyport is not being given carte blanche to ignore pre- existing environmental contamination. It is required to prudently assess each location on the airport property where it proposes to undertake any activity, and any other areas on the airport where it identifies a potential problem. Only when the pre- existing contamination meets the requirements of an acceptable risk will Skyport be free to not comply with this environmental legislation. This will save the Government money because it will not be funding the remediation of pre - existing contamination that poses no risk. With those remarks, Mr. Speaker, I now read this Bill for the second time, the Airport Redevelop632 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly ment Concession Act 2016 (or 2017) and I invite Ho nourable Members to participate. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. The Chair will now recognise the Honourable Member from constituency 24, MP Lawrence Scott.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottThank you, Mr. Speaker. B eing this is Friday night, Saturday morning, and—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerAll right. Saturday morning, that’s for sure.
Mr. W. Lawrence Scott—sitting out there in the kitchen area reminiscing with some of the other Members, brings back to memory that drinking game we used to play, Never Have I Ever. I do not know if you remember the game, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottWell, Never Have I Ever is where I would say Never have I ever lost an election. And if you have done it, if that person had lost an election, they would take a shot, or they would take a drink. So, therefore, Mr. Speaker, I would say, Never have …
Well, Never Have I Ever is where I would say Never have I ever lost an election. And if you have done it, if that person had lost an election, they would take a shot, or they would take a drink. So, therefore, Mr. Speaker, I would say, Never have I ever t hought that I would ever utter the words “President Trump.” And in that same aspect, I would say, Never have I ever thought that I would agree with him and say, Let’s take our country back. But I guess in this case I would be saying let’s take our airport back, because the OBA has just basically given this airport away. And the thing is, Mr. Speaker, the OBA, the Members on that side, the Premier is saying, Oh, it’s four o’clock in the morning and you are starting up a story and . . .Mr. Speaker, well — Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: I said four -thirty.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottOkay, four -thirty. They are complaining about the time that it is, Mr. Speaker, and they are talking about the time that it is— [Gavel]
Mr. W. Lawrence Scott—and to me, this is what needs to be done. They want to give our airport away? Then this is what you have to go through to do it, Mr. Speaker. This is what needs to be done. And, Mr. Speaker, the thing is I know they have not thought …
—and to me, this is what needs to be done. They want to give our airport away? Then this is what you have to go through to do it, Mr. Speaker. This is what needs to be done. And, Mr. Speaker, the thing is I know they have not thought this all the way through, quoting the Honourabl e Minister Grant Gibbons. Because, Mr. Speaker, when I brought this up in March of 2014, and talked about the Airport Authority should be the one that is independent and the Airport Authority should be the one that puts the contract out to tender, Mr. Spea ker, just like in other jurisdictions, just like in the Bahamas, in Trinidad and Tobago, in Jamaica, bas ically in the industrialised nations, the United States, and the EU, right? The way that the OBA has set this Airport Authority up is that the contractor tells the Ai rport Authority what to do, Mr. Speaker, and we have proven that, and this is where we go into the conces-sions, right? The contractor is telling the Airport Authority, These are the concessions I want. And we are at a point now, Mr. Speaker, that regardless of how bad of a job CCC and Aecon do, no matter how bad they mess up, we cannot fire them, right? The fact that Skyport is a company that is 100 per cent owned by non-Bermudians, Mr. Speaker, that is unheard of. That is what makes us the laughing stock of the avi ation community, because the other aviation communities are like, Hold on. Why are you giving the airport away? Why don’t you just create the Airport Authority, have the Airport Authority put things out to tender, and so on and so f orth? Because they talk about . . . and I hear other Members asking me what is my argument. I am going to get to the nitty -gritty of my argument. Things they do not know about us losing our classification as an international airport. That is what I am going to get to. And that is all because of these concessions, Mr. Speaker. And I can tell you how unprepared they are for this because they do not even have their aviation technical officers here, Mr. Speaker, to answer any of these questions that I would have to ask them. Or do they not think it is important enough to have them here? So, the thing is . . . and, Mr. Speaker, I still hear other Members saying, Let’s get on with it. No, we do not rush this, Mr. Speaker. This is something you take your time with, right? This is something that you make sure you do right, because the thing is that the last time I got up and talked about an Airport A uthority I was gavelled down, Mr. Speaker. The Hon-ourable Minister of Finance said I did not know what I was talkin g about. But yet, Mr. Speaker, he is bringing a Bill that is doing almost exactly what I said he was going to need to do, Mr. Speaker, but he just perver ted it. [Gavel]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottSo, Mr. Speaker, you follow premier league football. Right no w I feel like . . . well, I will not fault you for that, Mr. Speaker. But the thing is, right now, even though I am an Arsenal fan, I feel like Balotelli, like I should have a shirt …
So, Mr. Speaker, you follow premier league football. Right no w I feel like . . . well, I will not fault you for that, Mr. Speaker. But the thing is, right now, even though I am an Arsenal fan, I feel like Balotelli, like I should have a shirt on under this, rip this shirt open, that says “Why always me?”
Bermuda House of Assembly The thing is that this is our greatest asset, Mr. Speaker. We already outlined, and the Shadow Mini ster of Finance has outlined how much revenue we are conceding. And the thing is that the Minister of F inance basically wants us to give away or concede this airport for 30 years. And the Hansard will show that the Minister, back in 2014 when debating this said, ‘ I promise you that this is the best deal Bermuda could ever hope for.’ And then what they are doing now, Mr. Speaker, earlier today notable Members of the Gov-ernment mentioned the aviation industry officials who said this deal is creative. How would you feel, what would you do if you got on an airplane and the pilot says, We’re about to take off. We’re having some m echanical issues. But we’re going to come up with a creative way to fix it . . .would you feel safe? And Honourable Grant Gibbons says, not if I were the pilot. Okay, yes, that’s funny. Whatever. But the thing is that I still . . . even when he is joking about that , I still know more about aviation . . . I have forgotten more about aviation than he will ever learn, right? Therefore, the thing is that when it comes to this, Mr. Speaker, it is sort of, how would you feel if somebody, the Government, were to say , your banker says, You know what? I’ve got a creative way to i nvest your money . . . and the next thing you know you have lost it all. Your doctor says, I’ve got a creative way of treating you . . .and then you end up losing a limb, Mr. Speaker. So, just because somebody says something is creative does not mean that they actually agree with you. That is just a polite way of saying you do not know what you are doing. That is what that is, espe-cially in the aviation community, where we are all about the letter of the law, all about the regulations and all of that. But, Mr. Speaker, it sounds like . . . this takes me back to 1914, the Boy Scout’s Employment Scheme, which was called Bob-a- job week, Mr. Speaker. A bob equalled a shilling, yet . . . do you r emember Bob-a- job? A bob equalling a shilling, and you could get a shilling for shining shoes, washing cars, even cleaning jumbo jets at Heathrow. And the OBA employment scheme does not work nearly as good as the Bob-a- job Scout week, Mr. Speaker, because the OBA employment scheme in 2012 promi sed 2,000 jobs. And I notice how ever ybody went quiet when I mentioned 2,000 jobs, because they know they have not produced that, Mr. Speaker. But also the OBA said that the airport red evelopment would be part of the 2,000 jobs. So, let us just break that down, Mr. Speaker. The airport estimates only 247 Bermudian jobs, jobs that are not necessarily going to people who are currently unemployed. So, you cannot say that you created a job if somebody is not unemployed. Therefore, the reason that the Scouts Bob-a- job was so successful was that it focused on the scouts them-selves. And it did what was best for the scouts. Ther efore, to figure out why the OBA’s employment scheme is such a failure, you have to ask yourself, Who does it benefit? And right now, it seems to be benefitting Aecon. Therefore, we are giving up 1.6 . . . we are giving up over a billion dollars in revenue to employ 240 people who, once again, are not necessarily u nemployed. So, once again, you have to ask yourself, Who does it benefit? Ninety -eight per cent of the 240plus jobs are going to be temporary construction jobs. And the remaining two are administrative. So, neither one have job security, because after the construction is complete they are not going to be needed. And then after construction Skyport takes full control and they can actually, if they wanted to, fire all the Bermudians and bring in Canadians if they wanted to, Mr. Speak-er. Also, the thing is that with the concessions, part of the concessions is, and I can quote from the Agreement this contract includes the right to build “hotels, restaurants, meeting facilities, business cen-tres, exhibition centres, convention centres, confer-ence venues, casinos, marinas, sports and recreational facilities, trade fairs, miniature go lf facilities, driving ranges, theme parks, supermarkets, malls, educational and training facilities, sports and/or entertainment facilities, art galleries, museums, cinemas, planetary and space ports, real estate developments, energy generation, banks and exchanges,, shopping malls . . .” . What that basically boils down to, Mr. Speaker, is that they are taking control of any and all of the base land or any or all of the lands and the buildings on the airport structure, or within the airport land.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Minister. POINT OF ORDER [Relevance] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Honourable Member is reflecting on a former debate. We are here to di scuss the concessions Bill, and he is basically talking about the Bill we just passed. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes he is. …
Yes, Minister.
POINT OF ORDER [Relevance] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Honourable Member is reflecting on a former debate. We are here to di scuss the concessions Bill, and he is basically talking about the Bill we just passed. [Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes he is. We are talking about . . . this is the concession Bill.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Minister.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottMr. Speaker, the concessions apply to the commercial services that are done 634 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assembly over the 30 years. And, Mr. Speaker, part of the concession is allowing them to have use, access, and ownership of the land that the airport is …
Mr. Speaker, the concessions apply to the commercial services that are done 634 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly over the 30 years. And, Mr. Speaker, part of the concession is allowing them to have use, access, and ownership of the land that the airport is on. So this is part of build that we are talking about. If other Mem-bers started to talk about that in the other debate, well, they are closely related and I can understand why. But let me tell you why I bring it up now, because I am going to focus on something that I know that the Minister does not know about. The Honourable Minister, Grant Gibbons, who was so smart earlier, he does not know about this ei-ther because of the fact that with the way that this is structured, there is a possibility that we could lose our rating as an international airport. Yes. Everyone is quiet and listening because they do not know how we could lose . . .they think it is just a name. It is not just an international airport, to get international airport you have to be Class 1 certified, Mr. Speaker. Part of being Class 1 certified means that one of the many requirements is that your fire depar tment, your crash, fire rescue department, has to be able to get to the middle of the furthest operating run-way within three minutes. Why am I focusing on the fire department? Because the fact is that Aecon can, and it has been put out there in the public domain, that Aecon is looking to charge the fire department rent, or they have to move out. So, therefore, if the fire department has to move because Aecon wants to charge them rent and the Government does not want to pay that rent, if they have to move, and they move to where they cannot get to the middle of the furthest runway within three minutes, we would lose our Class 1 certification, lose the fact that we are an international airport, therefore no commercial airlines could fly to Bermuda.
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottRight? So, therefore . . . and, Mr. Speaker, if they think that . . . and I heard that the Honourable Grant Gibbons said this is nonsense. I would like for him to look up Part 131, section 319, and he will find it right there. I have a …
Right? So, therefore . . . and, Mr. Speaker, if they think that . . . and I heard that the Honourable Grant Gibbons said this is nonsense. I would like for him to look up Part 131, section 319, and he will find it right there. I have a feeling that he does not know what Part 131 is, Mr. Speaker.
[Inaudible interjections]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottMr. Speaker, that tells me these . . . the Honourable Minister of Finance and the Honourable Grant Gibbons do not know anything about aviation besides what technical officers have told them. And they are going to try to tell me what is right and what is wrong, Mr. Speaker? …
Mr. Speaker, that tells me these . . . the Honourable Minister of Finance and the Honourable Grant Gibbons do not know anything about aviation besides what technical officers have told them. And they are going to try to tell me what is right and what is wrong, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker, they are doing what I told them they should have done two years ago.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIt’s early in the morning. Let’s see if we can get through the night.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottThe Honourable Grant Gi bbons is asking why am I fussing. Because I gave them the plan, I spelled it out for them, how they should do it, and they still got it wrong, Mr. Speaker. I gave them an open- book test and they failed. How do you do …
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottYou know what I mean? So, Mr. Speaker, that takes me to my next point because going from the Bob-a- job scheme it sounds more like a pig- in-a-poke. And a pig- in-a-poke, for those who do not know what is going on, is that something is sold or bought …
You know what I mean? So, Mr. Speaker, that takes me to my next point because going from the Bob-a- job scheme it sounds more like a pig- in-a-poke. And a pig- in-a-poke, for those who do not know what is going on, is that something is sold or bought without knowing its true value or nature. And that is something that we have said time and time again. We do not really know what the true value or the true nature of this agreement is, Mr. Speaker, because it is done under secrecy. They have given everything away. But yet, what they are trying to tell us is that this will allow the Government to have more money for scholarships, police, roadside testing, protect seniors pensions —
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Speaker.
Mr. W. Lawrence Scott—implement — Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerYes, Honourable Minister. POINT OF ORDER [Relevance] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The Honourable Member is still doing the same thing. He is talking about the last debate.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHonourable Member, I will guide him.
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottThank you, Mr. Speaker. The fact that that Honourable Member is taking a point of order means that he must not know what this Bill is about. And he must not know what these Bermuda House of Assembly regulations are about, if he cannot tell the difference between the Airport …
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The fact that that Honourable Member is taking a point of order means that he must not know what this Bill is about. And he must not know what these
Bermuda House of Assembly regulations are about, if he cannot tell the difference between the Airport Authority and the concessions themselves, that is scary, Mr. Speaker, because an ybody who is worth their salt would know not to stand up and give me a point of order on aviation. So, therefore, I will go on to the next thing about ICAO [International Civil Aviation Organization]. And that is the United Nations special agency co mprised of 191 member states tasked as administration and governance of the airline industry. Not once have I heard the Honourable Minister of Finance or the Honourable Grant Gibbons mention ICAO. Yet, these are the guys that they have to get approva l from. But they do not know that because they are listening to Aecon. Aecon knew that they had to have the other contract and the other agreements renegotiated be-cause they were found to be unconstitutional in Ecu ador. So, Mr. Speaker, this is what . . . and they can laugh all they want, Mr. Speaker. Ignorance is bliss. And when it comes to ICAO, I encourage them . . . if they can tell me what document 9082 stands for, and what document 9082 contains. They cannot, Mr. Speaker, because they do not know. Thank you. That is what I want to hear, quiet. You should be taking notes. [Laughter]
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottBecause, Mr. Speaker, what document 9082 stands for, and what 9082 says is that an airport can make a modest profit. A modest profit. And all other revenue must be recycled, or cycled back in, or funnelled back into the airport itself to ei-ther sustain it or to work on …
Because, Mr. Speaker, what document 9082 stands for, and what 9082 says is that an airport can make a modest profit. A modest profit. And all other revenue must be recycled, or cycled back in, or funnelled back into the airport itself to ei-ther sustain it or to work on the capital projects. Now, when you put in $69 million, Mr. Speaker, a modest profit would be $70 million. If you make $70 millio n, or if you made $3 million, if you . . . Mr. Speaker.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerHow do the concessions impact that?
Mr. W. Lawrence ScottHow do the concessions impact that? The concessions impact that because the Honourable Member, the Minister of Finance, said that if the concessions were not a part of it, that the costs would have gone up for the project, Mr. Speaker. So this is why I am telling you how …
How do the concessions impact that? The concessions impact that because the Honourable Member, the Minister of Finance, said that if the concessions were not a part of it, that the costs would have gone up for the project, Mr. Speaker. So this is why I am telling you how the conces-sions are impacting it and how they impact the rules, all right? Therefore, that modest profit should not be $300 million or $600 million. Therefore, since you are not abiding by the international rules as set by the UN in document 9082, the UN has the ability, can come in and shut this down, Mr. Speaker. Or, at the very least cause Aecon to have to re negotiate. But, once again, they did not think this through. Now, the other concessions, the fact that now everything is going over to Aecon and the conces-sions and the price of what the concessions equate to, means that IATA [International Air Transport Associ ation] now gets involved. IATA gets involved because IATA is a trade association comprised of 283 airlines representing 117 countries. And IATA has issues with this as well, Mr. Speaker. That issue is because the cost of doing business in Bermuda has already been raised twice in 2016. Now, the regulations say that airline fees should only be reviewed once every three years and raised once every five years. But when you have it raised twice in one year, and then raised every year consecutively after that, that is an issue. And that is another fight that is going on behind the scene, Mr. Speaker. Therefore, this is why we have all these concessions, we are giving away all control, the Minister of Finance did not even want to allow for them to be a part of the decision- making process after the next election, but not allowing the Opposition to be a part of it, Mr. Speaker. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, with these concessions we are going to be building an airport, we are giving away all of this stuff for an airport that in its current state, Mr. Speaker . . . what do you think this airport is ranked currently out of the hundreds of ai rports in our jurisdiction? We are ranked number 7, Mr. Speaker. So now you have to ask yourselves, well, where is Quito Ecuador, which is Aecon’s most recent project, where are they ranked with a brand- new ai rport? They must be ranked number 1. No sir. Number 2? No sir. Mr. Speaker, they are ranked number 4. Therefore, if we are ranked number 7, and that means that we beat out the B ahamas, which built a new ai rport, we beat out Trinidad and Tobago, so you have to ask yourselves, is giving away billions of dollars in revenue, giving away all these concessions, is that what worth moving up three places, Mr. Speaker? Is it? Because it is not just the return on i nvestment, Mr. Speaker. We put all of this money into this, how many . . . the Honourable Minister of F inance cannot tell you how many people it is going to attract to the Island. The Honourable Grant Gibbons cannot tell you how much money it is going to gener-ate into our economy. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, it is just seems as though . . . how can I say it? This deal, these concessions are not coming from a place of . . . because the Minister says that he goes by the market and he does not abide by the rules of the House. He abides by the rules of the market, Mr. Speaker. All right? But from what I know about business, this does not seem like someone who is negotiating from a place of strength, from someone who is negotiating from a place of knowledge or intellect, Mr. Speaker. This is someone who is taking whatever is being fed to him and just saying, Okay. No problem. I’ll do it. That is not leadership; that is not what we want to see 636 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly from our Minister of Finance who controls the public purse. And, Mr. Speaker, I can almost guarantee you that what is going to happen after I sit down is that the Minister of Finance is going to get up and pull a Do nald Trump and call me all sorts of names and say I don’t know what I’m talking about, that so -called soand-so, but cannot refute any one of the facts that I put out there when it comes to aviation. Does not know what ICAO document 9082 stands for. Does not know what role IATA really plays. All he knows is what Aecon has told him. Therefore, you have to ask your-self, Who is really behind this deal? Who is really pul ling the strings behind the scene? And is this really the best deal for our country? Are these concessions what this country really needs? Because you have given away concessions to America’s Cup. We gave away concessions to Morgan’s Point. We have given away concessions again to Aecon. What is left on this I sland to give away, Mr. Speaker? What is going to be left for future generations, Mr. Speaker? And me mbers are saying that I’m what’s left to give away. The thing is that their laughing about this while . . . Mr. Speaker, they are treating us like Africa back in the days when you had the Europeans just divide it up. They looked at a map, Oh, Belgium, you get that; France, you get that. That is all they are doing. They are just cutting us up and giving us away to other jurisdictions, to other countries, and laughing about it as they do it. Do you see what I am saying, Mr. Speaker? It is almost like . . . but, Mr. Speaker, you should not be surprised, because that is what happened with cars back in the day. There were Members who sat back and said, No, no, no, we can’t have cars come on the Island . . . which dealership do you want? Oh, you want Nissan? Oh, you want Datsun? You want this? And then after they had decided which cars they were going to divvy up, that is when they approved it. And there are Members in this House today that are sitting here today who are related to those Members that made that type of decision. So, Mr. Speaker, I wonder, and I hope it is not true that when it comes to these types of concessions that this is not what was done, Mr. Speaker. I am hop-ing that the rumours are not true, Mr. Speaker. But these concessions in this Bill are not what is best for this country, and not what is best for moving forward. They put us at risk, and at the very worst we could lose all commercial air traffic because of something that we have no control over now, because the Hon-ourable Grant Gibbons, the Honourable Minister of Finance, have given away our airport with these concessions attached. Thank you.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Member. Does any other Honourable Member care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Leader of the Opposition. MP David Burt from constituency 18. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will be brief. But I think when listening to the Minister of F inance …
Thank you, Honourable Member. Does any other Honourable Member care to speak? The Chair will recognise the Leader of the Opposition. MP David Burt from constituency 18. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will be brief. But I think when listening to the Minister of F inance in his overall remarks he talked about the need for these concessions, and the various exemptions which we are giving to Aecon, and this is part of our contribution. It does not go un- noted, however, Mr. Speaker, and I would like to Minister to clarify the rea-son why it is necessary for our commercial services and any capital development under commercial ser-vices to be exempt from customs duties or otherwise. I mean, the thing is that this is commercial. This is not about the airport, this is not stuff that we do right now. This is not stuff that may be a hotel or otherwise which, if they did build a hotel, which they are able to do underneath the Project Agreement, then that would apply to a separate concession. The question is, Why are there blank concessions that are being given overall to this company, and why is it not just limited to the capital develop-ment that will take place at the airport itself? It seems that that presents a particular plan. I also want to make sure to ask for specific clarity regarding the employment and find out whether or not the payroll tax breaks that are envisioned for this company will apply to any type of commercial ser-vices or activities under any commercial services which they may engage in, as they have the right to engage underneath the Project Agreement. They can engage in additional commercial services. We note that they get a customs duty break for the construction of commercial services. The ques-tion is if Aecon has the airport and Aecon wants to open a building next door, and Aecon or a project called Bermuda Skyport has the employees, the fact of the matter is that they can get payroll tax breaks. And I want to find out whether or not there is any thought to the segregation of those, or are we just ba-sically saying that Project Co can set up multiple di fferent industries because they are a private company and they have a commercial agreement so they can do whatever it is they like, what do they feel as if they can have those payroll tax breaks as well, which means that they will basically almost have a duty -free zone over there at the airport. Kind of like they get their own free zone, they are able to build things i nside the leased lands they have, and they are able to do things for commercial services and profit while e njoying payroll tax and customs duty exemptions in this Act. So this is not just about the airport, Mr. Speaker. This is also about the leased lands that we are providing. And we know, we understand. The Honourable Member, the Shadow Minister of Transport, spoke about the fact that Government is now going to have to pay rent to Aecon or Bermuda Skyport for where our current fire station is. We were
Bermuda House of Assembly paying rent to ourselves; now we have to pay rent to a fire station. And, of course, we spoke about the mail processing facility earlier. So the challenges exist with that. So, they do have this land. And the question is, What are all the rights and easements and the reason why they are being extended basically blanket tax rates which could mean that they almost have their own free zone down there at the airport.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Leader of the Opposition. Any other Honourable Members care to speak? Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The fire service does not pay any rent down there, and the concessions are treated just like they would in a hotel property in Bermuda. The basis for …
Thank you, Leader of the Opposition. Any other Honourable Members care to speak? Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The fire service does not pay any rent down there, and the concessions are treated just like they would in a hotel property in Bermuda. The basis for these concessions is inward direct investment. So, like a hotel property, commercial services, they get the same tax break so long as it is Skyport that is do-ing it. It is exactly like hotel concessions work. So, I have no further comments, Mr. Speaker. Unless there are any other comments, I move that the Bill be committed.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Minister. Any objections to that? Then please, Deputy, if you would take the Chair [of Committee]. House in Committee at 5 :04 am [Saturday, 11 February 2017] [Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Chairman ] COMMITTEE ON BILL AIRPORT REDEVELOPMENT CONCESSION ACT 2017
The ChairmanChairmanMembers, we are now in Committee of the whole [House] for further consideration of the Bill entitled Airport Redevelopment Concession Act 2016. I would just like to propose the first amendment to the title, and that being Airport Redevelo pment Concession Act 2017. Any objections to that amendment? No objections. …
The ChairmanChairmanMinister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would like to move all clauses, please, 1 through 11.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been proposed that we move clauses 1 through 11. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. This Bill seeks to grant certain permissions, concessions and exemptions to facilitate and assist with the redevelopment of the L. F. …
It has been proposed that we move clauses 1 through 11. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. This Bill seeks to grant certain permissions, concessions and exemptions to facilitate and assist with the redevelopment of the L. F. Wade International Airport to the Developer and other specified entities involved w ith the redevelopment. Clause 1 is self -explanatory. Clause 2 provides definitions, many of which are linked to the Bermuda Airport Authority Bill 2017. Clause 3 introduces the Schedule which inserts two new CPCs into the Fifth and Sixth Sched-ules to the Customs Tariff Act 1970 to grant duty relief in relation to goods certified as imported and used only for the Airport Redevelopment. Clause 4 provides that no stamp duty shall be payable by the Developer, the Construction Contractor, Aecon or the Finance Parties, or chargeable in respect of any instrument relating to the Airport Rede-velopment or its financing thereof made or executed by such persons. Clause 5 dis -applies, as regards the Developer and the Finance Parties, any requirements in the Companies Act 1981, the Bermuda Immigration and Protection Act 1956 or any other relevant legislation, which would otherwise require a restricted person (as defined in section 72 of the 1956 Act) to obtain a l icence or any consents, sanctions or permits and to make payments in relation to their acquisition, holding or occupation of the Leased Premises as a lessee or mortgagee- in-possession for the purposes of the Ai rport Redevelopment, or in connection with the financ-ing thereof. Clause 6 provides that Developer, the Construction Contractor, Aecon and the Finance Parties shall not be liable to any land tax under the Land Val-uation and Tax Act 1967 in respect of any valuation unit (within the meaning of that Act) on the Airport Lands. Clause 7 provides that if any legislation is passed which imposes tax computed on profits or i ncome, or computed on any capital asset, gain or ap-preciation, or imposes services tax or any value - added tax or levy, it shall not be applicable to the D eveloper, Aecon, Management Co, the Construct ion Contractor or Subcontractors insofar as the tax or levy relates to the Airport Redevelopment. Clause 8 subsection (1) provides that the D eveloper, Aecon, Management Co, and the Construc638 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly tion Contractor shall be exempt from work permit fees in relation to any employee who is employed full- time in relation to the Airport Redevelopment. Subsection (2) provides that those entities and Subcontractors are exempt from paying the employer’s share of payroll tax to the extent employees are employed in the Co nstruction or Capital Projects, et cetera, undertaken concerning the Airport Operations and provision of Commercial Services. Subsection (3) provides, with respect to the Airport Operations, that the Developer and Management Co are exempt from paying the em-ployer’s share of payroll tax (as defined in subsection (4)). Clause 9 provides that, with respect to transactions, et cetera, related to the Airport Redevelop-ment or its financing, the Developer, Aecon, Man-agement Co, the Construction Contractor and the F inance Parties shall be exempt from the Exchange Control Act 1972, and the Exchange Control Regulations 1973, and permitted to pay their employees in US dollars (notwithstanding the provisions of those Acts and any other related legislation). Subsection (3) provides that the Developer, Aecon, Management Co, the Construction Contractor and the Finance Parties and each of their employees shall be exempt from foreign currency purchase tax for the purposes of any transactions in connection with the Airport Redevelopment or the financing thereof. Clause 10 subsections (2) and (3) provide that Canadian Commercial Corporation, the Developer, Aecon, Finance Parties, all subcontractors, and all of their respective officers and directors (the “exempted parties”) shall be exempt from environmental legisl ation in relation to pre- existing contamination, and that no action shall be brought or continued against any of the exempted parties for any alleged breach or noncompliance with any environmental legislation or any nuisanc e or other claim arising out of alleged pre - existing contamination, including in respect of pre-existing contamination migrating from the Airport Lands. Subsection (4) provides that these exemptions are subject to compliance with such terms and cond itions as are agreed between the Developer and the Authority, approved by the Minister responsible for the Authority and the Minister responsible for the env ironment, and posted on the Authority’s website. Su bsection (5) provides that in any action or proceeding, a certificate signed by the Chairman of the Authority certifying compliance with such terms and conditions shall be deemed to be conclusive proof of such com-pliance. Clause 11 provides for commencement.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 1 through 11? The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you. I was hoping the Minister would give clarity in clause [2] where it says “Management Co” and it says “means the …
Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 1 through 11? The Chair recognises the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you. I was hoping the Minister would give clarity in clause [2] where it says “Management Co” and it says “means the local company incorporated in Bermuda and registered on 20 September 2016 as Aecon I nternational Management Services Ltd, . . .;” how is that different from Bermuda Skyport?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I think there is a management company involved here that provides co nsultation to Skyport. That is what that means. Is that right? Yes.
The ChairmanChairmanAre there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 1 through 11? If there are no other Members . . . yes? No? The Chair recognised the Leader of the O pposition. Hon. E. David Burt: I am sorry. It is only because . . . I am …
The ChairmanChairmanTake your time. Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you. And I only ask because this is the first time we have seen this reference to the Management Co. It is not in the other Bill. Could the Minister be any more specific as to, particularly, the difference between the two, …
Take your time.
Hon. E. David Burt: Thank you. And I only ask because this is the first time we have seen this reference to the Management Co. It is not in the other Bill. Could the Minister be any more specific as to, particularly, the difference between the two, why it is not Skyport or other . . . I am just cur ious. It just came out of nowhere. It is the first time we are hearing it, so . . .
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, I am told this company will be providing back office services to Skyport.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any Members who would like to speak to clauses 1 through 11? There are no other Members, Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I move clauses 1 through 11.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 1 through 11 be approved as printed. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clauses 1 through 11 passed as amended.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move the Preamble. Bermuda House of Assembly The Chairman: It has been …
It has been moved that clauses 1 through 11 be approved as printed. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clauses 1 through 11 passed as amended.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move the Preamble.
Bermuda House of Assembly The Chairman: It has been moved that the Preamble be approved . . . oh, we do have Schedules before that.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Oh, we have Sc hedules. How many?
The ChairmanChairmanWe have one I believe. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move the Schedule.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Schedule be approved as printed. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Moti on carried: Schedule passed] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move the Preamble, please.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Preamble be approved. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Preamble passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: 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 with one amendment, and that is to the title. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agree d to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Airport Redevelopment Concession Act 2017 was considered by a committee of the whole …
It has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House as printed with one amendment, and that is to the title. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agree d to.
[Gavel]
[Motion carried: The Airport Redevelopment Concession Act 2017 was considered by a committee of the whole House and passed with one amendment.]
House resumed at 5:14 am [Saturday, 11 February 2017]
REPORT OF COMMITTEE
AIRPORT REDEVELOPMENT CONCESSION ACT 2017
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you, Honourable Members. The Airport Redevelopment Concession Act 2016, with the amendment to 2017, has been approved. I would think that the next orders are carried over. [Inaudible interjections]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerIf they are not, you are going to do them by yourselves! [Laughter]
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberMr. Speaker, we like being here by ourselves. [Laughter]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNow, now. All right. We go to the Third Readings. The Chair will recognise the Honourable Mi nister. SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move that Standing O rder 21 be suspended to enable me to move that the Bill entitled the Bermuda Airport Authority …
Now, now. All right. We go to the Third Readings. The Chair will recognise the Honourable Mi nister.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move that Standing O rder 21 be suspended to enable me to move that the Bill entitled the Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017 be now read a third time by its title only.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Any objections? Carry on. [Motion carried: Standing Order 21 suspended.] BILL THIRD READING BERMUDA AIRPORT AUTHORITY ACT 2017 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I now move that the Bill be passed.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. The Bill is now passed. Any objections? (Sorry) Any objections? There are some objections, but the Bill is passed. [Motion carried: The Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017 was read a third time and passed.] SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards : I move that …
Thank you. The Bill is now passed. Any objections? (Sorry) Any objections? There are some objections, but the Bill is passed.
[Motion carried: The Bermuda Airport Authority Act 2017 was read a third time and passed.]
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards : I move that Standing O rder 21 be suspended to enable me to move that the 640 10 February 2017 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assembly Bill entitled the Airport Redevelopment Concession Act 2017 be now read a third time by its title only.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Any objections? Carry on. [Motion carried: Standing Order 21 suspended.] BILL THIRD READING AIRPORT REDEVELOPMENT CONCESSION ACT 2017 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I now move that the Bill be passed.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. Any objections? There are some, but the Bill is passed. [Motion carried: The Airport Redevelopment Concession Act 2017 was read a third time and passed.]
The SpeakerThe SpeakerPremier. ADJOURNMENT Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Mr. Speaker, I move that we now adjourn.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerThank you. To Friday? Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Friday, the 10 th.
The SpeakerThe SpeakerNobody is speaking now. Don’t even try it! [Laughter]
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberI did have some things to say, but—
The SpeakerThe SpeakerDon’t even try it. The House is now adjourned until Friday the 17 th. [Gavel] [At 5:24 am (Saturday, 11 February 2017) the House stood adjourned until 10:00 am, Friday, 17 February 2017.]