The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe Minutes of 1 July 2016 are deferred. MESSAGES FROM THE GOVERNOR
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThere are none. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE SPEAKER OR MEMBER PRESIDING APOLOGIES
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerI would like to announce that the Honourable Speaker is currently overseas but will be returning for the next sitting of the House. And we have received information that Member Z. J. S. De Silva will be absent from today’s sitting. MESSAGES FROM THE SENATE
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThere are none. PAPERS AND OTHER COMMUNICATIONS TO THE HOUSE
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThere are none. STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS AND JUNIOR MINISTERS
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe Chair recognises the Ho nourable P. J. Gordon- Pamplin. SUMMER EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMME Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker . The Government is committed to the ongoing development and strengthening of our workforce by supporting the needs and educational pursuits of Bermudian College and University students …
The Chair recognises the Ho nourable P. J. Gordon- Pamplin. SUMMER EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMME Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker . The Government is committed to the ongoing development and strengthening of our workforce by supporting the needs and educational pursuits of Bermudian College and University students studying locally and overseas . We recogni se that access to meaningful workforce development opportunities and employment programs has the capacity to position our young people on the path to a long- term career. To that end, it gives me great pleasure to highlight the Summer Employment Programme coordinated through the Department of Workforce Development. The Summer Employment Programme assists participants in the development of their career goals by connecting work experiences to their academic learning . Work assignments are professional in nature and based on entry -level job des criptions. Madam Deputy Speaker , students must de monstrate full -time enrolment in a college or university. Successful participants are afforded the opportunity on academic merit, possessing a minimum cumulative grade point average (GPA) of 2.5 or higher. C ommunity involvement, a formal interview , and a personal statement of career goals are also required. Interns receive placements within government, private, and non-profit sectors where they develop leadership and decision making skills, time management, c onflict resolution, and career and work competency sta ndards. Madam Deputy Speaker , Monday, 16 th of May marked the commencement of the Summer Emplo yment Programme 2016. Over the course of the summer months, each Intern will complete up to 10 weeks . For their efforts, they will receive a $5000 total stipend over the 10- week period to assist with their educational and living costs. I have been advised that this year we have a group of phenomenal students. Some of the academic program mes our Interns are enrol led in include: •Law and Political Science; •Business ( including commerce, accounting, finance, and international business ); •Health (including pre- medical, pre- dentistry, nursing, occupational and physical therapy,public health, and pharmacy ); •Sciences ( including environmental sustainabi lity and protection, applied animal manage-ment and veterinary science); 2348 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly • Human Services ( including psychology, social work, forensic psychology); • Education ( including early -childhood, special education); • Information Technology (cyber security ); • Mechanical and Marine Engineering; Plum bing Technology; • Landscape Architecture; • Automotive Technology; • Television and Film, Digital Media, Graphic Design, and Theatre; • Criminology and Criminal Justice.
Madam Deputy Speaker , this Governm ent remains heavily vested in our young people, demonstrated by our continued commitment and support of the Summer Employment Programme. Although we have found it necessary to reduce budgets and curtail spending, the program me this year afforded 95 interns with work experience. What we have learned from our technical officers and students alike is that there are no shortages of summer employment opportunities for college and university students . We have been pleased to find that opportunities in the private sector have grown exponentially . Returning college students are often faced with multiple offers for summer e mployment . There is also an increased trend in students remaining abroad for the summer months to continue their academic studies or participate i n overseas i nternships. Madam Deputy Speaker , please allow me to highlight that the Department of Workforce Development has this year partnered with the Bermuda Gov-ernment London Office, creating the opportunity for one program me participant to complete t heir work experience in our London Office. This years’ successful candidate is Brandon Sousa, who is studying politics and international relations with Nottingham Trent University . Additionally, the London Office collaborated with the Depart ment to create a six -month internship for a recent graduate. This years’ successful candidate is Calyx Tucker who recently graduated from the University of Law, Bloomsbury Centre, with a graduate diploma in law. Needless to say, we are excited about this partnership with the London Office and the experience for both Brandon and Calyx. Madam Deputy Speaker , the benefits of the work experience opportunities and participation in the Summer Employment Programme extend well beyond the summer to influence career development over the long run . Several former program me participants have secured full -time employment with the very employers with which they were placed while participating in the program me. Madam Deputy Speaker , others reveal the Summer Employment Program me is an excellent opportunity to build experience in their respective areas of study . Many also find the exposure to real - world work experiences solidifies their chosen career path, thus they endeavo ur to pursue further graduate degrees. Madam Deputy Speaker , before I close, I must extend my thanks to those who have helped make this initiative such a success . Special thanks , of course, to the individuals at the Department of Wor kforce Development for continuing to go above and beyond to help young Bermudians. My fina l comments today are directed to our employers as well as to our participating students . To our business partners, I want to offer my sincere thanks to all of you for opening up your establis hments to our young people . Without your support the program me would not be successful . Our students truly benefit from your guidance and generosity . Thank you to the many government departments and quangos for providing the opportunity for our young people, and the following private sector and non- profit companies: • OBM I International • Zurich International (Bermuda) Ltd. • In Touch Therapy • Phoenix Stores, Woodbourne Chemist • Bermuda Motors • VIBE 103 • Tendercare Nursery • Centre on Philanthropy • Tomorrow’s Voices • Chamber of Commerce • Office of the Ombudsman
To the young people par ticipating this year, you are Bermuda’s future. We will continue to help in any way we can in equipping you to successfully make your way in what is becoming an increasingly competitive workforce. I wish you success in your work experience and upcoming studies. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker .
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Minister. I believe you have a second statement. SUMMER INTERNSHIPS FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes, thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker . Madam Deputy Speak er, Cabinet was r ecently informed of the potential of an upcoming summer employment initiative spearheaded by a prom …
Thank you, Minister. I believe you have a second statement.
SUMMER INTERNSHIPS FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Yes, thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker . Madam Deputy Speak er, Cabinet was r ecently informed of the potential of an upcoming summer employment initiative spearheaded by a prom inent Chief Executive Officer with International Bus iness . I am pleased at this time to provide more details on this innovative scheme. Madam Deputy Speaker , please indulge me and allow me to provide some background. In recent months, the Hono urable Premier Michael Dunkley was approached during his travels by a prominent member of the international business community, Mr.
Bermuda House of Assembly Ray Brooks, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of Grey Castle. Mr. Brooks proposed an opportunity for summer student s with his company, Grey Cast le, in order to provide practical exposure to international busines s. Having gained support for his gesture, Mr. Brooks subsequently arranged to meet with George Outerbridge, the Director of the Department of Workforce Development . After learning that the intended recipients of this opportunity would be high school students, the Director extended an invitation to meet with Dr. Radell Tankard, Education Officer with the Ministry of Education who agreed the initiative would be a tr emendous complement to the Ministry’s Career Pat hways Programme. Madam Deputy Speaker , Mr. Brooks and Grey Castle have the shared value of social respons ibility as good corporate citizens of Bermuda to provide opportunities for personal and professional develo pment to young Bermudia ns. His commitment extended beyond his company to enlist the support of two pr ofessional membership groups, namely , the Bermuda International Long Term Insurers and Reinsurers (BILTIR) , and the Young Presidents Organization (YPO) to encourage other international businesses to do the same. I am pleased to inform that as a result of these efforts, this initiative is set to launch on the 11 th of July 2016. Madam Deputy Speaker , presently there are 15 participating companies offering a non- paid summer internship for high school students attending government’s senior schools , Berkeley Institute, and C edarBridge Academy, who also have a keen interest in International Business . It is important to note that although the opportunity is non- paid, participating companies have been encouraged to offer a stipend to students. The program me will extend for six weeks with a member organi sation , and select students will have the opportunity to rotate on a two- to three- week rot ation to several companies . An orientation sess ion at the commencement of the program me for participating students will provide information on the international business sector and career path opportunities . Two social events are also planned during the internship. Madam Deputy Speaker , in addition to work experience, participating companies will provide gui dance and mentoring. Work assignments will be related to administrative and data entry to provide real world office experience. Madam Deputy Speaker , I wish to acknow ledge Mr. Brooks for his initiat ive and vision for young Bermudians and thank those who have worked to make this initiative possible . Special thanks to the collaborative efforts of the Ministry of Education, the D epartment of Workforce Development, Bermuda Inter-national Long Term Insurer s and Reinsurers (BILTIR) , and the Young Presidents Organization (YPO) . I also take the time to highlight the following companies from the member organis ations who’ve committed to pr o-viding work opportunities for our young people. They include: • Price waterhouseCooper s; • Athene Life Re; • Hannover Life Re Bermuda Ltd.; • Kane LPI Solutions; • Safe Harbor Re; • Royal Gazette; • Tuckers Point; • Phoenix Stores; • Fireminds; • Weisshorn Re; • Wilton Re; • Beechwood Bermuda; • Bermuda International Long Term Insurers & Reinsurers; and • Grey Castle Life Re.
Madam Deputy Speaker , research has shown that high school students who have employment opportunities, mentoring, and professional support early on are far better equipped to meet the demands of the competitive workforce than if they e nter later in their career . There is a strong correlation between early employment opportunities and reduced high school dropout rates. Madam Deputy Speaker , in keeping with the Government’s commitment to developing our young people, providing opportunity , and developing Bermuda’s future workforce, we wholeheartedly support this worthwhile initiative. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker .
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Minister. I believe we have another statement by the Honourable Member, R. W. Scott. You hav e the floor. STEM EDUCATION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Madam Deputy Speaker , I rise this morning to provide the Honourable members of this House an update …
Thank you, Minister. I believe we have another statement by the Honourable Member, R. W. Scott. You hav e the floor.
STEM EDUCATION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Madam Deputy Speaker , I rise this morning to provide the Honourable members of this House an update on the Career Pathways and Career Technical STEM programmes being impl emented by the Department of Education. For those who may not be aware, STEM is an acronym for Sc ience, Technology, Engineering, and Math education. The STEM Program me focuses on these areas t ogether, not only because the skills and knowledge in each discipline are essential for student success in the 21st century, but also because these fields are deeply intertwined in the “ real world” and in how some students learn most effectively. Madam Deputy Speaker , our students, supported by their parents/guardians, their teachers, school administrators , and department officers, have been exposed to many unique but challenging exper iences; and have achieved impact ful success during 2350 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly the academic year. This success extends from the summer Career Technical STEM programme that was first held in 2015. For the upcoming 2016/17 academic school year the Department of Education, in collaboration with the Bermuda College, has established an Applied Technology Programme. There will be 28 students from both CedarBridge Academy and the Berkeley Institute participating in this dual enrolment technology programme that merges five areas of exploration, namely: • construction technology and trades; • computer aided technical drawing; • programming for technicians; • electricity and electronics; and, • design and e ngineering.
Madam Deputy Speaker , the offering of this programme is in alignment with the STEM educational philosophy of exposing and challenging students to explore and complete the core technical disciplines while enhancing their math, science, communication , and computer skills. The learning experience for st udents will be the foundation that supports the compl etion of a STEM proj ect associated with their field of interest. Education in the STEM programme is a mult ifaceted, multidimensional international experience. Let me share two initiatives that are very much encouraging, and I am sure that the Honourable Members of this House and the listening audience will agree. The first initiative acknowledges a team of st udents from the CedarBridge Academy which was su ccessful in reaching the championship level in the STEMBoard Solar Grand Challenge competition. Madam Deputy Speaker , this competition is being hosted by DHL Worldwide Express and STE MBoard Partners in the Bahamas from July 17 th to 22nd, 2016. It is offering teams of students from the Bahamas, Bermuda, and the Cayman Islands an opport unity to create portable, low -cost solar en ergy sol utions. Students from the winning team will earn up to $10,000 in prizes. Additionally, these students may see their ideas come to fruition and assist DHL E xpress to reduce utility costs at its office facilities. Madam Deputy Speaker , the success of our students building this mobile solar STEM unit is a direct outflow of a partnership with Bermuda College and industry partner Mr. Joseph Weeks, Owner of Combined Engineering Technologies. We all can a ppreciate the old adage that has proven to be consi stent in my experi ence, that says, Proper Planning Prevents Poor Performance. The combined know ledge and expertise of Mr. Weeks; Bermuda College instructor Mr. Delroy Musson; and teacher Mr. Iman Gibbons, will steer the students and guide them through a prototype solar building project at the Bermuda College, leading up to their departure to attend the Solar Grand Challenge in the Bahamas. Madam Deputy Speaker , We applaud our students who are involved in this competition. The Bermuda team comprises Cedar Bridge Academy st udents , Eric Wallace and Malachi Butterfield, and Z orico Gilbert . We certainly wish them good success as they compete in the Bahamas , and eagerly wait to hear of their exploits as we are confident that they will represent Bermuda well. And, Madam Deputy Speaker , I will take this moment to just bring to the attention of the public of Bermuda the importance of keeping travel documents up because one of our students may not be able to travel because their documents are out of date, and we are w orking with her. Of course, being a STEM initiative we have a backup where we could use video conferencing, Google Hangouts , to enable them to participate in this. But I have seen this too often, especially in sports and education, where travel doc uments are not up to date and students are missing out on opportunities because of that. So I would encourage parents and guardians to let us ensure that we keep these documents current so that our students do not lose out on these opportunities. Madam Deputy Speaker , the second STEM initiative involves a partnership between the U.S. Consulate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) , and the Department of Education. The programme entitled GLOBE , or Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the Envir onment , is cu rrently associated with the Primary 5 level, at Paget Primary School. We commend STEM P5 teacher and Deputy Principal, Sonia Haley, along with Content Specialist Teacher for Science, Kali Douglas for their diligence and dedication in providing the leadership and guidance to our students. The teachers will showcase our Primary school GLOBE atmospheric experiment at the GLOBE Annual Review taking place this summer in Denver, Colorado. Having seen both of these initiatives, Madam Deputy Speaker , I can tell you it is very impressive. I mean, our elementary school students’ data is being used worldwide on a daily basis by NASA as they look at different atmospheric information from around the globe. So I say well done to our students. Madam Deputy Sp eaker , Some of our middle and senior school teachers recently participated in a STEM pedagogy active learning experience. The event was facilitated by the Department of Education and the Bermuda College Tech Hall Department with assistance from overseas partners STEM Academy, Inc., or STEM 101. STEM 101 is a non- profit thought leader, and a provider of STEM education pr ogram mes throughout the United States. This is a first - time collaborative STEM active learning programme that will be continued as we expand our efforts in i mplementing STEM Education. STEM 101 will be supporting STEM teacher training development in Bermuda for those middle school teachers who partic ipate in the programme using the STEM—
Bermuda House of Assembly The Deputy Speaker: Members, I am having a diff icult tim e listening. And I would like to be able to hear the Members’ Statements, so if you could bring down the sound. And I might also point out at this opportunity that it is quite cool and comfortable in the House t oday, and we should all be dressed appropriately, and that would be great at this point. Thank you. Minister, please proceed.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker . I guess I can’t take off my jacket today; I was looking forward to that. But I digress. STEM 101 will be supporting STEM teacher training development in Bermuda. For those middle school teachers who participate in the programme using the STEM curriculum in design and tech, math, and science, they will be expected to implement their acquired learning and apply the skills during the next school academic year and beyond. As you can see Madam Deputy Speaker our students and teachers are developing in the understanding, knowledge, and skills of Career Technical STEM Education. When I last shared with this House about the Career Pathways initiative and the benefit of providing high school students with opportunities to gain mean-ingful experience in the workplace, I reported on the success with the Bermuda Insurance Institute’s General Insurance Certification. I would be remiss if I did not mention or reiterate a few things that my colleague just outlined with regard to the programme by Mr. Ray Brooks of Grey Castle. I would like to congratulate him and the WPO group. And, of course, I have declared my interest being a member of WPO. This is som ething that I think we would like to do more of to pr ovide our children with opportunity. So, again, I would like to congratulate Mr. Ray Brooks. And we will be encouraging our high school students from the public school system to take adv antage of this worthwhile opportunity that was just outlined by my colleague. There are a number of STEM summer camps that will operate between July 4 th and July 26th, 2016. I encourage my Honourable colleagues and the liste ning audience to save the date—July 26th—and invest the time to visit the CedarBridge Academy and o bserve the showcase of knowledge, skills, technical giftedness, and artistic expressions of our public school students. This continued success in the Career Pat hways and STEM initiatives c learly outlines that we need to expand upon this interest and demand which is stimulating student inquiry and curiosity. As we have raised the interest of middle and senior school students with Career Technical STEM education, as well as our primary school s, it is apparent that we need to increase this approach for all schooling and education. As such, we will diligently work towards this end. And I will keep the House updated and look forward to an initiative of what we are doing with STEAM, coming up next . Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker .
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Minister. That concludes Statements by Ministers and Junior Ministers. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. We hav e a few questions to ask on the Statements, and we are going to do them in order. So for the first s tatement , Summer Employment Pr ogramme, which was made by the Honourable J. P. Gordon- Pamplin, the Chair recognises the Member from constituency …
Thank you. We hav e a few questions to ask on the Statements, and we are going to do them in order. So for the first s tatement , Summer Employment Pr ogramme, which was made by the Honourable J. P. Gordon- Pamplin, the Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13, Devonshi re North, Mr. D. V. S. Rabain. You have the floor.
QUESTION 1: SUMMER EMPLOYMENT PR OGRAMME
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. First, I want to say that I have always been proud of this programme and happy to see it conti nued at the level that it is being continued. However, I do have a few questions for the Minister. Madam Deputy Speaker, on page three, …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. First, I want to say that I have always been proud of this programme and happy to see it conti nued at the level that it is being continued. However, I do have a few questions for the Minister. Madam Deputy Speaker, on page three, the Minister states, “What we have learned from our tec hnical officers and students alike is that there are no shortages of summer employment opportunities for college and university students.” My question to the Minister is, Do we have any statistics that show how many students are act ually seeking employment?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I do not have the specific numbers, but we do know that the students to whom we were trying to offer opportunities declined because they had other multiple opportunities for the summer. …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I do not have the specific numbers, but we do know that the students to whom we were trying to offer opportunities declined because they had other multiple opportunities for the summer. I do not have an overview of all of the students who were seeking summer employment. I am sure that could be made available.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13. SUPPLEMENTARY 2352 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly Mr. Diallo V. S. Rabain: Yes, just a supplementary. I appreciate the answer that I did receive from the Mi nister, because I do think it is …
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13.
SUPPLEMENTARY
2352 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly Mr. Diallo V. S. Rabain: Yes, just a supplementary. I appreciate the answer that I did receive from the Mi nister, because I do think it is important that if we are going to state that we have an abundance of opport unities and over -opportunities, we need to be clear exactly how many of them there are, because we could just be saying that, and I do know that sometimes some students just do not bother to register , so we do not know if we are actually capturing them. But supplementary to that is , we often hear of complaints t hat students cannot find employment during the summer. I would like to know what outreach programmes are being employed by the Government to try to capture these students that are returning.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Clearly the summer programmes . . . there has to be a certain amount of initiative taken by the students or their families to make sure that they are registered so as …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Clearly the summer programmes . . . there has to be a certain amount of initiative taken by the students or their families to make sure that they are registered so as opportunit ies are made available that they are apprised of those opportunities. Outside of that, we have, as you can see, an outreach within the international business community and various other local companies just reminding proprietors and bus inesses that we have students coming in for the summer and to ensure that to whatever extent possible they make those opportunities available so that we do not have the frustration of students returning home without any work.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Minister. The Chair recognises . . . this is a supplementary? Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. You have the floor. SUPPLEMENTARY Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Just reading from the Statement that says that there are no shortages of summer employment, may I ask the Minister if there are students who are presently …
The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. You have the floor.
SUPPLEMENTARY Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Just reading from the Statement that says that there are no shortages of summer employment, may I ask the Minister if there are students who are presently unemployed, where can they apply to, because there are some students that I know of who are u nemployed.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would encourage them to make their pos itions known to the Department of Workforce Deve lopment, because that is the focal point for coordinating the summer programmes that are being made …
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Minister. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13.
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Second Question. QUESTION 2: SUMMER EMPLOYMENT PR OGRAMME
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainOn the next page it states, “Several former programme participants have secured full-time employment with the very employers with which they were placed while participating in the programme.” Once again I ask, are there any statistics to show us exactly how many of these students were placed?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I do not have those specific statistics , no.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13. SUPPLEMENTAR IES
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainAgain, supplementary to that same question. Following on from the summer e mployment, can the Minister let us know , because one of the things that we often hear, I am sure every single one of us has heard when we were canvassing is , My son (or my daughter) …
Again, supplementary to that same question. Following on from the summer e mployment, can the Minister let us know , because one of the things that we often hear, I am sure every single one of us has heard when we were canvassing is , My son (or my daughter) has done X amount of years of school and they graduated and they cannot find a job. Now, what we are seeing here is that there is an abundance of opportunities out there that obviously these people can fill. So the question is, What is being done . . . what can students do who have graduated and are looking for employment? Who do they contact at the Department of Workforce Development to get a hold of some of these opportunities that are being said are out there?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Bermuda House of Assembly The training officer at the Department is Pa ndora Glasford. However, it is important that we take responsibility as a community when our young people are determining what …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Bermuda House of Assembly The training officer at the Department is Pa ndora Glasford. However, it is important that we take responsibility as a community when our young people are determining what to study, that they are studying in appropriate disciplines, because what happens is that if you have someone studying for something and those types of jobs are not available, then it creates a lot of frustration. So we want to make sure that there is proper and effective career guidance as well for students before they go overseas as they are making their choic es for studying. My experience is that when people are coming home, having studied, having graduated and not being able to find work opportunities, sometimes (I am not saying all the time, but sometimes) it is because the discipline that they studied is not one that is very popular or has a great demand.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Minister. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13.
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainSupplementary, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Department of Workforce Development has traditionally focused on technical expertise and putting advice out there for technical professions. What we are talking about here . . . this Statement talks almost exclusively about professional type degrees. So my question is, Are we saying that the …
Supplementary, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Department of Workforce Development has traditionally focused on technical expertise and putting advice out there for technical professions. What we are talking about here . . . this Statement talks almost exclusively about professional type degrees. So my question is, Are we saying that the D epartment of Workforce Development has included all professions like that , or are they still focused on tec hnical? Because from my experience of being down there at the department , that was one of the issues and one of the reasons I personally sought to be part of the National Training Board, because as an employer I was interviewing young men and women for jobs and understanding that what they thought they had done in school was inappropriate for what it is they thought they really wanted to do. So, I wanted to get involved and say, Hey, here are some different options that you can go. So the question still is, Is the department marching away from providing advice on technical fields and more into all fields?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chai r recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I appreciate that question, because it gives me the opportunity to advise Members here and members of the public that the Department of Workforce Development , and especially through Job …
Thank you, Member. The Chai r recognises the Minister.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I appreciate that question, because it gives me the opportunity to advise Members here and members of the public that the Department of Workforce Development , and especially through Job Board , is focusing on all emplo yment, not just the trades.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. There was a supplementary from the Member from constituency 33 . . . No? Okay, thank you. If there are no other questions on the first statement, we will move to the second statement. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13. QUESTION 1: SUMMER INTERNSHIP FOR HIGH …
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainThank you, Deputy Speaker. I read through the Statement and I am quite happy with what is going on. I am quite pleased to see that there has been some movement within this industry to reach out especially to public school students. My question to the Minister is . . …
Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I read through the Statement and I am quite happy with what is going on. I am quite pleased to see that there has been some movement within this industry to reach out especially to public school students. My question to the Minister is . . . I am looking through the Statement, but it does not st ate how many st udents have been placed or taken advantage of this programme to date.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I really thought I had that number in the Statement. And I do apologise for that. I will have to get the actual number. I do know that there were 15 companies that had offered, and whether …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I really thought I had that number in the Statement. And I do apologise for that. I will have to get the actual number. I do know that there were 15 companies that had offered, and whether any of them were . . . Oh, sorry, there were 10 students who had taken up the 15 opportunities. Sorry, I just got the information from my technical off icer. These are the high school students.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13, the gavel will go down. SUPPLEMENTARY
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainJust a supplementary. As the Minister correctly pointed out, it states that 15 participating companies are offering non- paid summer internship for high school students. But the question is, How many positions does that translate into, exactly.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member . The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: There are 10 pos itions and the students will be able to rotate around those positions.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13.
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainI don’t know if it is a suppl ementary or a follow up. I wanted clarification of whether it was just 10 students. Okay. Thank you. 2354 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly The Deputy Speaker: Thank you. There are no other supplementaries. We will …
I don’t know if it is a suppl ementary or a follow up. I wanted clarification of whether it was just 10 students. Okay. Thank you. 2354 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly The Deputy Speaker: Thank you. There are no other supplementaries. We will then move to the third statement, and the third stat ement was —
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Sorry, Madam Deputy Speaker, I just wanted to make sure that, for the purposes of correct reporting in Hansard, there are 15 companies, so, therefore, a minimum of 15 positions. There are 10 s tudents, and the 10 students will rotate around within those 15 positions. I just want to make sure that for the record that was made clear. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much. We will now move to the third statement on STEM Education in the public school system. The Chair will first recognise the Member from constituency 21, Pembroke South East, Mr. Rolfe Commissiong. QUESTION 1: STEM EDUCATION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. If I may, just very quickly, I mean, anytime I hear the term Career Pathways being used it warms my heart. I know it came out of the Mincy Report. I just want to say this, the Minister talked about the STEAM and STEM education. …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. If I may, just very quickly, I mean, anytime I hear the term Career Pathways being used it warms my heart. I know it came out of the Mincy Report. I just want to say this, the Minister talked about the STEAM and STEM education. My question is, Are there any teaching modules that promote the teaching of computer coding within the STEAM and STEM programmes that he mentioned? We know that there is a growing interest in that with a number of organisations promoting coding in the community amongst our young people.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, thank you, that is a good question. We just recently, last week I believe, had a group, STEAM 101, down here training some of our teachers to actually provide STEM education. So, yes, there are some modules …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, thank you, that is a good question. We just recently, last week I believe, had a group, STEAM 101, down here training some of our teachers to actually provide STEM education. So, yes, there are some modules out there. However, we actually are just trying to play tack up again. If you recall, going back about a decade or so ago, we had the B. TEC, the Bermuda Technology Education Collaborative, which actu ally provided coding training in Berkeley and CedarBridge, so a lot of the private sector was a part of it. As a mat-ter of fact, when I was the chief technology officer of Logic Communications, I actually taught classes at both of those facilities on that. And that is something that I guess did not have the sustainability to do it, unfortunately. There are a bunch of other initiatives that are out there that our students are a part of that actively do comprise of coding and things like that which would be in the private sector. So, yes, we are wor king and having more partnerships to facilitate this. We need to actually do it more and that is something that we are focusing on really getting this back into the active curriculum because it was there and it dis appeared. And I am going to ensure that that happens.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 15. SUPPLEMENTARIES
Mr. Walter H. RobanMadam Deputy Speaker, my supplementary question to the Minister is, In his reply he mentioned the B. TEC programme and how that started in the private sector and then migrated into the public school system. So my question is, What is cu rrently the state of that programme as it …
Madam Deputy Speaker, my supplementary question to the Minister is, In his reply he mentioned the B. TEC programme and how that started in the private sector and then migrated into the public school system. So my question is, What is cu rrently the state of that programme as it migrated from private into public? What is the current state of that programme in the public system, if the Minister can give just a brief sort of update on that?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, and forgive me if I do not have my dates quite set. That programme, which was a partnership between the Ministry of Education, the University of Maryland, and Stanford University, act ually d ied in the Ministry …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, and forgive me if I do not have my dates quite set. That programme, which was a partnership between the Ministry of Education, the University of Maryland, and Stanford University, act ually d ied in the Ministry of Education around 2006 or 2007, or so. So, we are actively working to ensure that these things are back into our system so they are available, and we are working to ensure that STEM education and STEAM education are active parts of our system going forward.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 15. Is this a supplementary?
Mr. Walter H. RobanMadam Deputy Speaker, could the Minister (and I am not trying to be difficult here) just say what he means by saying “died”? Was that because of a lack of funding, or personnel was no longer available, or some of the resources needed for it were not avail able? Could …
Madam Deputy Speaker, could the Minister (and I am not trying to be difficult here) just say what he means by saying “died”? Was that because of a lack of funding, or personnel was no longer available, or some of the resources needed for it were not avail able? Could he just say what he means by “died” please?
Bermuda House of Assembly The Deputy Speaker: Thank you very much. The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Madam Deputy Speaker, I know this is getting a little bit outside of this, but I think it is importa nt, because this is actually a Bermuda i ssue. I am not passing blame on any Government because this is a Bermuda problem. This was a public/private initiative, if you will, that was being driven by the private sector because they had the expertise in this area. As a matter of fact, we went so far, and I was a part of it from the private sector so I am aware of it, we had a big symposium and people from different islands in the Caribbean came up to see this wonder-ful programme that we had, and the then Mini ster was so excited about it, he said, We are going to take this over at the Ministry of Education. And from the private sector I was sitting there thinking like, Oh no! This is not good. And it was taken over by the Ministry of Education and promptly died probably about a year later. So we have to ensure that . . . I was a part of that pr ogramme, so that is actually correct. So I think that the Bermuda opportunity that we have here is, especially with some of the pr ogrammes that we are doing now with th e insurance industry and Career Pathways and such, we have to ensure that when we have the private sector involved in helping our students get these benefits that we a llow it to continue to work. So, this is something that is an opportunity. And you have m y commitment that I will do my best to ensure that we keep these things going. And I will keep all Members up to date on that.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 21. Is this a new question or supplementary?
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. To the Minister, I understand in response to my question that you did outline a number of real or potential collaborative efforts to get our young st udents on the coding bandwagon by probably making these partnerships with non- governmental organis ations. My question remains …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. To the Minister, I understand in response to my question that you did outline a number of real or potential collaborative efforts to get our young st udents on the coding bandwagon by probably making these partnerships with non- governmental organis ations. My question remains whether we are seeing the teaching of coding within the respective modules under the umbr ella of the Career Academy? Is that happening within the schools, the teaching of coding i tself?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises . . . Minister, if you would just wait to be acknowledged . . . the Chair recognises the Minister . Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Thank you. If I was not clear on that, yes absolutely. So every STEM programme that we do have …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises . . . Minister, if you would just wait to be acknowledged . . . the Chair recognises the Minister .
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Thank you. If I was not clear on that, yes absolutely. So every STEM programme that we do have does involve a module of coding. There was a programme last summer; we are doing that again this summer. The goal is to have that to become more and more prevalent within an academic year.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 18. This is a supplementary?
Mr. E. David BurtI just want to be clear that . . . the Minister just got up and said there are summer pr ogrammes. So, is that to say that during the year there are no current coding programmes inside of our high schools and/or middle schools? And if there are, can …
I just want to be clear that . . . the Minister just got up and said there are summer pr ogrammes. So, is that to say that during the year there are no current coding programmes inside of our high schools and/or middle schools? And if there are, can the Minister explain what action takes place during the year, not during the four week summer programmes, but during the academic year.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: There is coding that goes on, I can get the specifics of that. What I was talking about specifically was STEM initiatives as a STEM pr ogramme, which we started last summer by having a summer programme specific …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: There is coding that goes on, I can get the specifics of that. What I was talking about specifically was STEM initiatives as a STEM pr ogramme, which we started last summer by having a summer programme specific with STEM, and STEAM as well. We provided training for that within the last couple of weeks. We actually have another summer programme now and it is our intention to have STEM and STEAM as initiatives put into our system. That does not say that with current computer classes there are not some initiatives going on now, but I would have to give you details of that. I do not have that information with me right now.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 18.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. In his response the Minister seemed to say 2356 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly that there may be some things in development. Can he be specific as to whether or not in the next ac ademic year there will …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. In his response the Minister seemed to say 2356 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly that there may be some things in development. Can he be specific as to whether or not in the next ac ademic year there will be programming courses that will be available, or programmes in our high schools and/or middle schools? That is the question. We hear about the summer students, we hear about different programmes, we hear one school that is mentioned here, a private primary. The question is one school out of how many? Is this something that is going to be rolled out across the board for all high school students to be a part of, or are we just talking about tiny poc kets of students getting exposure, as opposed to a broad spectrum of students which require the exp osure?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Thank you. The one broad programme that was in the schools even a decade ago died. So what I am act ually attempting to do is . . . so, what I outlined last year, Member, was that …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Thank you. The one broad programme that was in the schools even a decade ago died. So what I am act ually attempting to do is . . . so, what I outlined last year, Member, was that we are looking to actively i nstitute STEM and STEAM programmes. We started it with summer programmes. We now have taken it to the next step of training a bunch of teachers. We are doing another summer programme. There are many extracurricular activities and programmes that go on throughout the school year. It is our intention to have this as an integral part of our academic programming. But it is not as consistent and not as integrated as we would like. We are starting. We have to start from som ewhere. And that is what we are doing.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you Member. Is this a supplementary, or do you have a question? SUPPLEMENTARY
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 3.
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoSo, Minister, could you clarify whether or not you are going to be doing that come next year? That is my supplementary question.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: As I said on more than one occasion, that is our intention, yes.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Is this another supplementary, or your own question?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 3. QUESTION 1: STEM EDUCATION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Minister, given the erratic results in the middle school level, and given that the stats sort of prove that there is a high level of inconsistency with the delivery of instruction within the middle school level, would you consider ensuring that training is applied across …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Minister, given the erratic results in the middle school level, and given that the stats sort of prove that there is a high level of inconsistency with the delivery of instruction within the middle school level, would you consider ensuring that training is applied across the board so as to make certain that we do not continue to have results that are mercurial, Minister?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, that is our goal. I mean, I think that when you are putting in an initiative like STEAM or STEM, you cannot train all 800 of your teachers or 1,000 of your teachers, but we are doing …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, that is our goal. I mean, I think that when you are putting in an initiative like STEAM or STEM, you cannot train all 800 of your teachers or 1,000 of your teachers, but we are doing that. We facilitated training by an overseas vendor during the last couple of weeks specifically for this. We recognise t hat it has to grow, and I am not satisfied with the inconsistency that we have. We have to do a better job. This is something that is dear to my heart. I am a technology person. I get it. I understand the i mportance of it. And, you know, just as sport or music and everything else, this needs to be a consistent part of our academics for our children.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 3. Is this a supplementary or a new question?
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, it was not clear. SUPPLEMENTARY
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoAll I am asking, Minister, because you highlighted the fact that you are just provi ding training for some, and I think it is a real concern. Bermuda House of Assembly So, I would like to hear that training is across the board. If this is an initiative from the …
All I am asking, Minister, because you highlighted the fact that you are just provi ding training for some, and I think it is a real concern.
Bermuda House of Assembly So, I would like to hear that training is across the board. If this is an initiative from the Ministry of Educ ation then it should not be just for some. I t needs to be across the board so you are approaching from a sy stem-wide level the middle school teachers, and not just some.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair now recognises the Minister. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, all right, we are getti ng a little bit outside of what this is about now. And to be quite frank, I disagree with that approach. I think that, you know, if we want to ensure …
Thank you, Member. The Chair now recognises the Minister.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, all right, we are getti ng a little bit outside of what this is about now. And to be quite frank, I disagree with that approach. I think that, you know, if we want to ensure that we are doing this correctly, you want to . . . you know, when you have STEAM and STEM pr ogrammes, yes, they are used across all different sub-jects, so they can be used by even an English teacher or language teacher. But when we are starting a pr ogramme, let us make sure that we do it properly. We are training teachers to do this. As we continue to move and get this more integrated, the whole benefit of STEM, particularly, it is not just technical, it can be integrated into every subject. So, yes, the opportunity will exist, but you do not start that way.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognis es the Member from constituency 3.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much. Please proceed. QUESTION 2: STEM EDUCATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoWhat type of evaluation tools will be in place to measure the performance of those students who are participating in this STEM pr ogramme across the board, versus those students who are not? If we are just doing something, we just ca nnot do it to just do it. If …
What type of evaluation tools will be in place to measure the performance of those students who are participating in this STEM pr ogramme across the board, versus those students who are not? If we are just doing something, we just ca nnot do it to just do it. If we say that Education is buying into it, then we must have the proper tools in place to measure performance and growth and the like.
The Depu ty Speaker: Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: I fully agree with that, Madam Deputy Speaker. But, certainly, the Member cannot expect for me to stand here and outline valuation methodologies used throughout the sy stem on a new initiative. I mean, come on, we are getting a little bit past what this is about. This is an opportunity of benefit for our st udents, and it is valid. We certainly have to ensure that we have proper evaluations and make sure that our childre n are getting the best of it, but we have to act ually have the programmes in place in order to do that, which did not exist before.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. If there are no other questions for this final statement we will close the Question Period, and move on to the Order Paper. CONGRATULATORY AND/OR OBITUARY SPEECHES
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe Chair recognises the Member from constituency 35. You have the floor. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like this House to send condolences to the family of Calvin O’Mara, who was killed in an accident earlier this week. Also, Madam Deputy …
The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 35. You have the floor. Hon. Dennis P. Lister: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like this House to send condolences to the family of Calvin O’Mara, who was killed in an accident earlier this week. Also, Madam Deputy Speaker, Mr. O’Mara is survived by his wife and children, and if we can pray even for the truck driver and the crew of the Works and Engineering sanitation truck, because I am sure they are feeling some effects of this accident earlier this week. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Honourable Pr emier. Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Good morning and thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to be associated with those condolences and also I would assume, Madam Deputy Speaker, on behalf of all colleagues in the House, I wish to extend …
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Honourable Pr emier.
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Good morning and thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to be associated with those condolences and also I would assume, Madam Deputy Speaker, on behalf of all colleagues in the House, I wish to extend condolences to Sir John Swan on the passing of his wife Lad y Jacqueline Swan. Honourable Members were this week struck by the outpouring of heartfelt condolences and tri butes paid to Lady Swan who, by all accounts in my opinion, was a person of great poise, elegance and certainly grace. She touched many people throughout our community in her lifetime. Madam Deputy Speaker, in paying tribute to Lady Swan earlier this week I recalled that she, in my opinion, was one of the most respected and influential women. She had certainly been very supportive and devoted to h er husband, former Premier, Sir John Swan. During his premiership she welcomed royalty, prime ministers, and certainly presidents to the Island. Yet, in my opinion, and I would believe that is shared by Members of this House, she will perhaps be most 2358 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly remem bered by the significant contributions she made through her noble volunteer service to many important charities throughout our Island helping young people and helping our seniors and certainly our most vulnerable in our community. And in that regard, she w as an individual who, I believe, had extraordinary humility, generosity, and compassion. I had the distinct honour of knowing Lady Swan for many, many years. I have always been struck by her dignity and her grace. She was a woman who would not only give her time and advice freely to people, but she did so with such extraordinary ease. And I personally have been very appreciative of her wisdom, advice, and counsel through the years. In my opinion, Madam Deputy Speaker, she was a woman of very significant quiet strength, commitment, and dedication. And Lady Swan’s legacy will live on forever. She truly, truly left an indelible mark on Bermuda, and her contribution to Bermuda has left us in a better place. She was also a very devoted and beloved wife of man y years, and a nurturing mother to her entire family. So I ask that during this period of grieving that we remember Sir John, Alison, Amanda, and Nicholas, and the entire Swan family. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Mem ber from constituency 31. You have the floor.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, good morning. I would like to be associated with the remarks made by the Premier in relation to the passing of Lady Swan. I always thought that that moniker for her was quite appropriate, Madam Deputy Speaker, because she was a lady, and graceful as …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, good morning. I would like to be associated with the remarks made by the Premier in relation to the passing of Lady Swan. I always thought that that moniker for her was quite appropriate, Madam Deputy Speaker, because she was a lady, and graceful as a beautiful swan . I had the privilege to get to know her perso nally and spend time in her home where she was the consummate host, who loved to have functions there, loved to cook, and was always committed to ensuring that her guests were well taken care of. Despite her admonition to her husband not to discuss politics, Sir John would always take me around the corner and we would do just that. But she was just a lady that loved her family. One thing that people do not appreciate is that we know Sir John Swan because of his contributions to the country. But the royalty in their family came from the Roberts side. I do not know if you know the Roberts side, Madam Deputy Speaker. But they are the ones that held that aristocratic, royal sort of flair to them. I got to know her brother very well, A lty Roberts . They were a very close knit family, and unfortunately in the last few years they have had to deal with tragedy like this. So at this time, certainly this House would like to send our condolences to the entire family. I had the occasion, along with my honourable and learned friend Mr. Pettingill, to speak to Sir John this week. As expected, he was strong and in good spirits, but of course said that, although this passing was foreseen, it still struck him very hard. So, of course, I would like to add my condolences to the Premier’s remarks. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 15. You have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would just certainly give my comments. The whole House has already been associated with the condolences to the family of Sir John and the passing of Lady Swan, but I would just like to put my own per-sonal comments on that. One thing that …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would just certainly give my comments. The whole House has already been associated with the condolences to the family of Sir John and the passing of Lady Swan, but I would just like to put my own per-sonal comments on that. One thing that has already been said is that Lady Swan was . . . another outstanding quality of hers was her genuine kindness and warmth to those who had occasion to have made her acquaintance, and m y family, certainly the Francis family, has a long association with her and Sir John, and all of my own opportunities to be with her were filled with warmth and kindness and genuineness irrespective of what were the political differences with her and her husband. So I wish to be associated in that way with knowing her and having that wonderful experience in her presence. The other condolences I would like to ensure are recorded, although the Premier has already given national notice, is the passing of the late Prime Mini ster of Trinidad and Tobago, Patrick Manning, who passed last week. It was quite shocking and sudden, but it appears to have had an illness that was extended and died as a result of that illness. His ass ociation with Bermuda is long, certainly through the PLP. He was a friend of the PLP and a friend of the past leadership, particularly L. Frederick Wade and Dame Lois. And he came here at one point to speak to us when he was an Opposition Leader, prior to becoming Prime Minister. But he is a true giant of the Caribbean and the Caribbean’s development over particularly the post - Bustamante/Williams era. And he is one of the giants of the 1980s and 1990s of Caribbean politics. So it is important that we note his passing. Certainly for the PLP it is something that we want to note. And since the country has already noted it, we are grateful that the country has also taken note of this gentleman, his legacy and his importance to the region’s politics. Thank you.
The Deputy Spe aker: Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members who would like to speak? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 23. You have the floor.
Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, it would be r emiss of me to not stand in support of the comments made by the Honourable Premier with respect to the condo-lences to the family of Sir John on the passing of Lady Swan. It was 50 years ago almost to the day that I was poac hed away as a 16- year-old bookkeeper from Rego Limited to come up and work for John Swan Agency when he was actually housed in Church Street, where Global House now stands. And within very short order, having met Jackie Swan at that point, I was immediately struck by her genteel nature, just her dignity with which she carried herself. Jackie, at the time, was a schoolteacher when I met her. And we actually ultimately moved from the Church Street building to the building that Sir John built on Victoria Street. And I can remember her coming in, and I can remember her announcing to us as the staff that she was pregnant with her first child. So I go back with this family an awful, awful, awful long way. I have admired Jackie Swan, Lady Swan, as the Honourable Member from [constit uency] 31 indi cated, as she was a lady. I can reme mber attending a function at Southampton Princess. It was a Speaker’s dinner. And there was something that was said that just absolutely tickled my fancy, and the person with whom I was sitting, I just could not stop laughing, to the point that I was almost hysterical. It was funny. And I was trying to suppress my laug hter. And in looking up, all I could see was Jackie Swan looking at me in such a way —she said nothing, but I knew that my reaction to whatever was funny was above and beyond what was appropriate. And it was very easy for me to stifle that laugh in a split second, because I knew that I had been admonished by just the look. I watched her as she served at the hospital as a Pink Lady. I have been with her throug h the birth of her other children, and basically got to know and to love her and respect her as an individual. Sir John and Lady Swan actually were tremendously instr umental in my own personal development, because you can imagine as a 16- year-old young per son coming into that environment and to see her interaction. She was very, very good friends at the time with the wife of the then- accountant for the company, and that was Leon Mirren; her name was Tish. And Tish and Jackie were inseparable. So I had the opportunity to see these two wonderful, dignified ladies in action and knew, notwithstanding what I had learned from my home and the standards that were expected of me imparted by my mom, that this was a standard to emulate. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 21. Mr. Rolfe Commissiong: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I just want to associate myself with the cond olences offered by the Premier of Bermuda with r espect to Lady Jackie Swan and, of course, the Prime Minister of Trinidad, …
Thank you. The Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 21. Mr. Rolfe Commissiong: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I just want to associate myself with the cond olences offered by the Premier of Bermuda with r espect to Lady Jackie Swan and, of course, the Prime Minister of Trinidad, the Honourable Patrick Manning. With respect to Lady Swan, to me she was the qui ntessential Bermudian woman, dare I say black Bermudian woman. And the Members are right to note her graciousness, and I would even say her kindness, which she projected just by the way she looked at one, the way she carried herself. You know, the Bible, to paraphrase it, says that (and with the risk of sounding a little sexist), A man is blessed by having a good wife, and certainly, Sir John Swan was blessed by being married to Lady Jackie Swan. And her contributions to Bermuda and Bermudian life have been duly noted. And I send my condolences to the family. I first met her as a candidate for the Progressive Labour Party in the immediate aftermath of the death of former MP John Stubbs, and I ran against the Honourable Member Grant Gibbons. And I remember sitting off on more than one occasion up there in Grape Bay as she played the perfect hostess. My last sighting of her was on the Railway Trail about four months ago. I had heard that she was seriously ill. But here she was, looking like Jackie Swan—all due r espect —with a friend, walking on the trail just down the hill or in that area that parallels, just past the “S” hill area, in Paget. And we stopped, and we had a brief little conversation. And it was just heartbreaking to know that, months later, she had passed. With respect to Patrick Manning, a lot has been said. And I appreciate the Premier, as someone of Trinidadian ancestry in this House, along with, of course, the Minister Gordon- Pamplin, whose father, of course, was the great champion of Bermudian l abour—that is, Dr. E. F. Gordon. We appreciate the outpouring of condolences to the Trinidadian Go vernment on the passing of that great leader. To me, he was like the lion of the Caribbean during his [tenure as] Prime Minister of Trinidad, during that mid- to late-1990s period and through the first decade of the twenty -first century. He was always committed to West I ndian and Caribbean integration. He was one of those who believed in a federal Caribbean, federal West Indies. That dream has not been realised. But certainly, with people like the Prime Minister of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Ralph Gonsalves, those were the two who really epitomised the ideal of what the Caribbean could be. And so, it was a great blow for me personally to know that he has finally moved on. But his contributions to the Caribbean in terms of CARICOM [Cari bbean Community] and Trinidad and Tobago in partic ular, cannot go unnoticed.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. 2360 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 28, Warwick West. You have the floor.
Mr. Jeff SousaGood morning, Madam Deputy Speaker. Good morning to those in the House and those in the listening audience. I likewise would like to be associated with the condolences to Lady Swan that were first expressed by our Premier and also other colleagues here in the House. I rise today to …
Good morning, Madam Deputy Speaker. Good morning to those in the House and those in the listening audience. I likewise would like to be associated with the condolences to Lady Swan that were first expressed by our Premier and also other colleagues here in the House. I rise today to ask that the House congratulate our very own Flora Duffy for her Gold Medal in the recent [Vattenfall] World Triathlon championships in Sweden. This was an unbelievable achievement for not just herself, but Bermuda. I mean, now Flora will represent Bermuda in the upcoming Olympics and now is a firm favourite to stand on the podium. Many of us have watched this young athlete as she has risen in her chosen sport. And I am sure all of us truly hope that she will be the second Bermudian to win an Olympic medal at the games in Brazil, to be held shortly. Madam Speaker, it would not be right for me, on my feet, not to congratulate Portugal for qualifying in the Finals of the European Cup, particularly, Madam Deputy Speaker, as 25 per cent of the people of Bermuda have Portuguese blood running through their veins. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Mine included. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 36. You have the floor. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Madam Deputy Speaker, thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker, I too would like to be . . . And it was quite right and absolutely right for the Premier to associate …
Thank you. Mine included. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 36. You have the floor. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Madam Deputy Speaker, thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker, I too would like to be . . . And it was quite right and absolutely right for the Premier to associate the entire House with the cond olences on the occasion of the passing of Lady Jacqueline Swan and to the family of Sir John from the Pr emier of this country, and to the family, to the children in particular, who must be feeling the passing of their mom pretty hard at this time, as these sad events will do for children and spouses. I did not remember or recognise that Lady Jacqueline Swan was a teacher. First, may I say, I am touched deeply by it because Jacqueline Swan, Lady Swan, was a friend. And the news hit me hard, when you lose a friend. But reading the information, I did not remember that Lady Jacqueline was a [teacher]. I think it is because she stayed at it only for seven years, and then she committed her life with Sir John’s rise in the political and public life’s sphere to suppor ting, being a supportive wife and being the supportive person to a highly public figure. And she did it with such grace. And so that is one of the attributes that I remember about my friend, Lady Jacqueline Swan— what a gracious lady. She reminds me of the line of ladies, women, in this cou n-try, black women in this country —Lady Madree Ric hards, and then she became the second lady to one of our early black knights, Sir Edward, and then Sir John. I wonder, and I think it might be right, that Lady Madree will have produced the wonderful blueprint for how to serve in this role. And I think that Lady Swan, while she was distinctive in her own way, would have admired Lady Madree and sought to copy some of the good principles about how one conducts oneself in this role. But to her legacy of public service, because having given up teaching (for seven years, which was considerable), she committed herself to public service. And I can recall my brother, the Assistant Clerk of this House, Randolph Scott , sharing with me the commi tment and work that Lady Swan did at the Packwood Home. And there is a wonderful picture of myself, photograph of myself, with myself in my tuxedo and all of these beautiful ladies. Lady Swan was amongst them. Shirley James was amongst them. Former Member of this House, Louise Jackson, was amongst them, and my sister -in-law, Sandra Scott . All the single ladies and myself. I do not know wher e the husbands were on that particular occasion, but it was the Cartier’s Club, yet another committed public service that Lady Swan engaged in with great vigour and effectiveness.
[Timer beeps]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Your time was up. Hon. Michael J. Scott: My time is up. So, to the family my condolences.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much. The Chair recognises the Minister from constituency 22. You have the floor. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would also like to be associated with the condolences from the Premier to Sir John, Nicholas, Amanda, Alison; to the Roberts family, …
Thank you very much. The Chair recognises the Minister from constituency 22. You have the floor. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would also like to be associated with the condolences from the Premier to Sir John, Nicholas, Amanda, Alison; to the Roberts family, all of the Ro berts, on the passing of Lady Swan. As Honourable Members have noted, she was indeed a very gracious ambass ador for Bermuda in her own right, a very genuine and kind individual, certainly a role model, and quietly did much through her charitable and personal outreach, for Bermuda. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members w ho would like to speak? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13. Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Diallo V. S. Rabain: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like a letter of congratulations sent to Ms. Valerie …
Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members w ho would like to speak? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13.
Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Diallo V. S. Rabain: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like a letter of congratulations sent to Ms. Valerie Williams, the retiring Principal at Victor Scott. Madam Deputy Speaker, Ms. Williams represents a type of teacher that we just do not see anymore, we really do not see, and what we need more of. I remember Ms. Williams. Well, she remembers me. She began teaching at E lliot [Primary] in 197 6 in Primary -1, and I was in her very first class. And she makes a point of reminding me about that every time I do see her. That is an i ncredible 40 years ago. She spent 32 years at Elliot Primary, and there is an indelible mark that she has left on hundr eds—hundreds . . . I would probably have to say thousands of children across this Island who can reach back and say, This is where I got my fou ndation, and this is how I move forward. It was a bitte rsweet moment to see her leave from the Elliot School family, to see her leave and go to Victor Scott. But we knew that she was going on to bigger and better things, and she was able to become the principal at Victor Scott and effect even wider effectiveness amongst her young charges. So, it is sad to see teachers of this stature go. And I do wish, I do hope that the Ministry looks at teachers like this who are still vibrant and able to con-tribute, and bring them back to help with some of the issues that we are having now. And with that, Madam Deputy Speaker, that is what I would like to say. And I would also like to associate Ms. Outerbridge, Mr. Burt and Ms. Wilson with those comments. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much. The Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 14. You have the fl oor.
Mr. Glen SmithGood morning, and thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to be associated with the Pr emier’s comments in regards to condolences to Sir John Swan, his children, Alison, Amanda and Nick, and not forgetting her precious ones, the grandchi ldren. They were the apple of her eye; that …
Good morning, and thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to be associated with the Pr emier’s comments in regards to condolences to Sir John Swan, his children, Alison, Amanda and Nick, and not forgetting her precious ones, the grandchi ldren. They were the apple of her eye; that is for sure. Do you know there are a lot of similarities in Lady Swan to Jackie Kennedy? And I looked at a quote just recently, and Jackie Kennedy once said, “I’ll be a wife and mother first, then First Lady.” And she certainly fit that bill; there is no doubt about it. My co lleagues have said all the wonderful things, and I could not add anything nicer to say than everyone has stated in the House today. I would also like to send congratulations to Capt ain Craigin Curtis. He won the recent Bilfish Tournament this past week, which brings numerous overseas folks to Bermuda. He is a local fisherman. His boat is called the Reel Addiction. And they also won the World Cup, so put Bermuda on the map. So the acc umulated funds that went to that chartered boat were $530,000. So, with Bermuda being put on the map—this year we seem to have had a few more billfish coming back; I think they have netted or caught about 48 on the lines this past week —it is a good sign, s o hopefully it will drive more boats here, which drives the economy. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are there any other Members? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 1. You have the floor. Hon. Kenneth (Ken ny) Bascome: Good morning, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to be associated with the condolences to Sir John Swan on the passing of Lady Swan. I have …
Thank you. Are there any other Members? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 1. You have the floor.
Hon. Kenneth (Ken ny) Bascome: Good morning, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to be associated with the condolences to Sir John Swan on the passing of Lady Swan. I have had numerous encounters with Lady Swan over the telephone. I would always call to speak to Sir John wh ile he was the Premier and after. And she would always holler. And Lady Swan never called me Kenneth. She always would refer to me as Mr. Bascome. So I would like to be associated with those comments. Right now, I would like to say, personally, I believe that as a country we should say thank you to the Bermuda Police Service, Madam Deputy Speaker. And I would like to say thank you to all the young men and women who are joining that particular service at this particular time, Madam Deputy Speaker, because we are living in a volatile time, and I would like to say thank you to all the young men and women who are joining the Bermuda Police Service. I would like to say congratulations to Mr. Akil Simmons, who has just been promoted to the head photographer of t he Bermuda Royal Gazette. This is a young man whom I have had numerous conversations with. I was speaking with him yesterday, and I did not realise that he actually had been promoted to the head photographer. And I said to him, Well, you’ve proven that when you believe, you can achieve, and with desire, you can acquire. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to congrats or obits? There are no other Members, so we will g o on to the next item on the Order Paper. MATTERS OF PRIVILEGE
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThere are none. PERSONAL EXPLANATION 2362 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly The Deputy Speaker: The Chair recognises the A ttorney General, from constituency 9. You have the floor. IN RESPONSE TO MP CROCKWELL ’S RESIGN ATION FROM THE OBA Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Thank …
There are none.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
2362 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly The Deputy Speaker: The Chair recognises the A ttorney General, from constituency 9. You have the floor.
IN RESPONSE TO MP CROCKWELL ’S RESIGN ATION FROM THE OBA
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Thank you. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I stand today to respond to the statement made last Friday evening during the motion to adjourn by the Honourable and Learned Member for constit uency 31, Shawn Crockwell. In his statement, MP Crockwell has incorrectly stated that, by letter to him, I had instructed that ne ither MP Pettingill, MP Crockwell nor any member of their firm could represent any client against the Government. This statement by the Honour able and Learned Member is incorrect. First of all, let me confirm that I did send a letter, dated 3rd of June 2016, to MP Crockwell. That letter arose from correspondence between a client of his and the Bermuda Police Service in respect of a dispute. I w ill not go into any more detail than that out of respect for the interests of his client, although I take the view that MP Crockwell has waived any legal priv ilege by raising the matter in public. Second, I did object to MP Crockwell, and Pettingill & Co. , representing that particular client in that particular matter. The reason for this is because various aspects of the dispute were connected to a contractual matter, features of which were subject to advice by the Attorney General and came before Cabinet for decision on two separate occasions during the course of 2013 when the Honourable and Learned member for constituency 25, Mark Pettingill, was ser ving as Attorney General. Counsel in Chambers raised concerns with me that there was a material conflict of interest with MP Crockwell representing that particular client in that particular matter. In my 3 rd of June letter, I sought to inform MP Crockwell that, as a result of his acting for this client in this matter, there was a potential breach of the Barri sters’ Code of Professional Conduct [1981]. With your permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, let me read Rule 24A of the Code, which I quoted in my letter and which all members of the Bar must comply with.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerPlease proceed. Hon. Trevor G. M oniz: “Where a barrister or a me mber of his staff who has acted on behalf of a client in a matter, irrespective of the nature of the matter, subs equently joins another firm (‘the new firm’) which acts or has the opportunity of …
Please proceed.
Hon. Trevor G. M oniz: “Where a barrister or a me mber of his staff who has acted on behalf of a client in a matter, irrespective of the nature of the matter, subs equently joins another firm (‘the new firm’) which acts or has the opportunity of acting for a party with interests adverse to those of the former client, he or that staff member and the new firm should cease or de-cline to act in the matter if he or the staff member is by virtue of his former capacity in possession of material information which would not properly h ave become available to him in his new capacity: Provided that the Bar Council may, after ascertaining the views of the former client, exempt a barrister or a member of his staff from the above requirement.” MP Pettingill served as Attorney General from late 2012 through to mid- 2014. The Government of Bermuda was his client then. His present firm, which includes MP Crockwell, now represents a client in a dispute against the Government. The foundations of this dispute touch upon a contract which made its w ay through the Attorney General’s Chambers partly during MP Pettingill’s ten-ure as Attorney General. Cabinet made two separate decisions in respect of that contract, with MP Pettingill participating as Minister of Legal Affairs and Attorney General, and MP Crockwell participating as a Minister. In my opinion, there is a reasonable perception of a conflict of interest. Madam Deputy Speaker, Rule 24A of the Bar Code of Professional Conduct states that this prohib ition against acting for a client applies wher e lawyers have access to information they would not otherwise have had were it not for their former capacities. If the client in question had hired someone other than MP’s Pettingill and Crockwell, they would not possess the knowledge and information of tw o former Cabinet Mi nisters, one of whom was Government’s principal legal adviser. Madam Deputy Speaker, there is nothing untoward or surprising about this rule and about its a pplication in the present case. The Code of Professional Conduct applies each an d every time a lawyer leaves one firm to join another. You will often see law firms having to give up files for this exact reason. And Government is as much a client as anyone else and should be entitled to the same level of protection afforded to any other private person. What is interesting, Madam Deputy Speaker, is that Rule 24A of the Bar Code of Conduct has a proviso which states very clearly that MP’s Pettingill and Crockwell could apply to the Bar Council for an exemption from the requirement. And m ight I say, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bar —
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMember, you cannot deviate from your statement. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Okay. That is fine. I wrote to MP Crockwell in the following terms in my 3 rd of June 2016 letter: I said, “As a result of the above, I invite you, your firm and anyone working for your …
Member, you cannot deviate from your statement.
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Okay. That is fine. I wrote to MP Crockwell in the following terms in my 3 rd of June 2016 letter: I said, “As a result of the above, I invite you, your firm and anyone working for your firm, to remove yourselves from this matter and to avoid representing either this client or any other persons against the Government in future so that any potential conflict of interest and an y potential breaches of the Code can be avoided.”
Bermuda House of Assembly I politely invited MP Crockwell to take this course of action to avoid the perception of anything untoward. This cannot be said to be an instruction or intimidation. This letter was not the end of the matter. MP Crockwell wrote back to me on 7th of June 2016 and took issue with my invocation of Rule 24A of the Bar Code [of Conduct]. He also stated that his firm “have instructed Queen’s Counsel to thoroughly address this issue with a view to sending you hi s legal opinion in due course.” At the time, I appreciated and accepted this professional courtesy. I was therefore more than surprised when MP Crockwell made his statement in the House last Friday. I have not received a copy of the QC’s opinion which w as promised to me. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to state the facts, and we still look forward to resolving this matter.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Next on the Order Paper? NOTICE OF MOTIONS FOR THE ADJOURNMENT OF TH E HOUSE ON MATTERS OF URGENT PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThere are none. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS GOVERNMENT BILLS
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThere is one Bill. The Chair recognises the Honourable Dr. E. G. Gibbons. You have the floor. FIRST READIN G MOTOR CAR AMENDMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2016 Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am introducing the following Bill for its first reading so that …
There is one Bill. The Chair recognises the Honourable Dr. E. G. Gibbons. You have the floor.
FIRST READIN G
MOTOR CAR AMENDMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2016
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Deputy 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: Motor Car Amendment (No. 2) Act 2016. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Next on the Order Paper? OPPOSITION BILLS
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerI believe Or ders 1 and 2 are carried over. So we will move to Order number 3 on the Order Paper, which is the Second Reading of the Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of A ppeals) Act 2016. I call on the Minister in charge. Please proceed. Hon. E. T. …
I believe Or ders 1 and 2 are carried over. So we will move to Order number 3 on the Order Paper, which is the Second Reading of the Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of A ppeals) Act 2016. I call on the Minister in charge. Please proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Ric hards: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Bill entitled the Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of Appeals) Act 2016 be now read the second time.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Please proceed. BILL SECOND READING BERMUDA MONETARY AUTHORITY (DETERM INATION OF APPEALS) ACT 2016 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker, I present today the Bill entitled the Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determinatio n of Appeals) Act 2016. Members …
Thank you. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Please proceed.
BILL
SECOND READING
BERMUDA MONETARY AUTHORITY (DETERM INATION OF APPEALS) ACT 2016
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker, I present today the Bill entitled the Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determinatio n of Appeals) Act 2016. Members of this Honourable House are aware of Bermuda’s role as a lead-ing international financial services centre. One reason for the prominent position Bermuda enjoys is the a ppropriateness and reliability of the legislative and regulatory frameworks in place to govern the activities of financial services providers operating in or from Bermuda. Within this context, it is important for the Government and the Bermuda Monetary Authority (her einafter referred to as the Authority or the BMA) to regularly review these frameworks and update them, where relevant, to ensure consistency and the ado ption of best practices. Let me say, Madam Deputy Speaker, that at this time we have three rather technical Bills that we are covering this morning. And very often people are going to wonder, What the heck have these things got to do with me? Well, this one in particular is strengt hening a system that determines the credibility of Ber-muda in the international marketplace. And that cred ibility helps to support the companies that operate in 2364 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly Bermuda, particularly the international companies, and those international companies employ Bermudians. They also spend money in businesses that employ Bermudians. And they spend all kinds of money in Bermuda that positively affect Bermudians. So even though this is a somewhat arcane matter, as the next two are going to be, I think it is important for folks to know that these things have a direct impact on them. And it is Government’s efforts to try to ensure that s uch companies remain in Bermuda and flourish. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bill before you is an example of these efforts to ensure the effectiv eness of Bermuda’s legislative and regulatory fram eworks. The Bill’s highlighted changes proposed to be made to th e rights of appeal under certain regulatory Acts in order to address existing gaps. It is proposed that the Bill be introduced and that it amends the following regulatory Act, and they are as follows: • Insurance Act 1978; • Banks and Deposit Companies Act 1999; • Trusts (Regulation of Trust Business) Act 2001; • Investment Business Act 2003; • Investment Funds Act 2006; • Corporate Service Provider Business Act 2012.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the purpose of this Bill is to make provisions under the Acts to clarify all rights of appeal arising under the Rights of Appeal sections of each of the Acts, as they fall within the scope of the question of determination of the relevant tribunal, being whether, for reasons given by the a pplicant, decision was unlawful or not justif ied by the evidence on which it was based. Madam Deputy Speaker, under the current Determination of Appeals sections of the Acts, several of the rights of appeal that arise under the relevant Rights of Appeal section were inadvertently omitted. Therefore, it is proposed for the existing expressed rights of appeal under each of the Acts to be deleted, the result of which is that a general reference will now be made to said provisions to ensure that all such rights arising are within scope of the question for d etermination by the tribunal under the Determination of Appeal provisions of the Act. Madam Deputy Speaker, Members are advised that consultation was carried out with the indus-try on this matter, in particular via a notice issued by the authority on th e 12 th of May 2016, which highlighted changes proposed and reasons for these. Madam Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, I would like to thank Members of the Ministry of Finance, the Attorney General’s Chambers, the Bermuda Monetary A uthority [BMA] and the representative industry groups for work done to prepare this legislative submission. With that, Madam Deputy Speaker, I refer the matter to Members for their comments. The Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Minister. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to the Bill entitled Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of Appeals) Act 2016? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 18, Mr. E. D. G. Burt. You have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, as the Minister of Finance has indicated, we have some largely technical Bills that we have to deal with this morning, and as is the case, as I find myself sounding like a broken record, by and large, when these …
Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, as the Minister of Finance has indicated, we have some largely technical Bills that we have to deal with this morning, and as is the case, as I find myself sounding like a broken record, by and large, when these types of things come before the House we al ways seem to hold hands. And it is that wonderful axis between industry, government and the regulator that has worked so well in Bermuda. As has previously happened, we have consulted with technical officers inside the Ministry of F inance. Our caucus has been briefed on the contents of all of the technical matters which we are dealing with today, and they enjoy our support. So we look forward to moving them forward. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members wh o would like to speak to the Bill before us? There are no other Members. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Honourable Member used the phrase “ a broken record. ” …
Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members wh o would like to speak to the Bill before us? There are no other Members. The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Honourable Member used the phrase “ a broken record. ” I wonder if anybody really knows what that means anymore? [Laughter]
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThirty -three or forty -five?
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberOr seventy -eight? [Laughter] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: With those remarks, Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Bill be committed. The Deputy Spea ker: It has moved that the Bill be committed. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency …
Or seventy -eight? [Laughter] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: With those remarks, Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Bill be committed.
The Deputy Spea ker: It has moved that the Bill be committed. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 14. Mr. G. C. Smith, you will take the [Chair of] Committee.
House in Committee
[Mr. Glen Smith, Chairman]
Bermuda House of Assembly COMMITTEE ON BILL
BERMUDA MONETARY AUTHORITY (DETERM INATION OF APPEALS) ACT 2016
The ChairmanChairmanWe are now in Committee of the whole for further consideration of the Bill entitled Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of Appeals) Act 2016 . I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister, you have the floor. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards : Thank you, Mr. Chai rman. Mr. …
We are now in Committee of the whole for further consideration of the Bill entitled Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of Appeals) Act 2016 . I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister, you have the floor. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards : Thank you, Mr. Chai rman. Mr. Chairman, I would like to move all clauses, clauses 1 through 8. In doing so, Mr. Chairman, clause 1 is the stated citation clause and cites the Bill as the Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of Appeals) Act 2016. Clause 2 amends section 44C(2) of the Insurance Act 1978 so as to remove the limitations on the scope of appeals to which the section applies. This section is amended by deleting the words “section 29(1) and (2),” and substituting “section 29.” Clause 3 am ends section 32(1) of the Banks and Deposit Companies Act 1999 so as to remove the limitations on the scope of appeals to which the section applies. This section is amended by deleting the words “section 31(1) and (2)” and substituting “section 30.” Clause 4 amends section 31(1) of the Trusts (Regulation of Trust Business) Act 2001 so as to r emove the limitations on the scope of appeals to which the section applies. This section is amended by delet-ing the words “section 29(1) and (2),” and substituting “section 29.” Clause 5 amends section 35(2) of the Inves tment Business Act 2003 so as to remove the limit ations on the scope of appeals to which the section applies. This section is amended by deleting the words “sections 33(1) and (2)” and substituting “section 33.” Clause 6 amends section 57(2) of the Inves tment Funds Act 2006 so as to remove the limitations on the scope of appeals to which the section applies. This section is amended by deleting the words “sections 55(1) and (3)” and substituting “section 55 .” Clause 7 amends section 38(1) of the Corp orate Service Provider Business Act 2012 so as to r emove the limitations on the scope of appeals to which the section applies. This section is amended by deleting the words “section 36(1) and (2)” and substitutin g the words “section 36.” Clause 8 provides for the commencement date of the Act. Those are all the clauses, Mr. Chairman, and I move clauses 1 through 8.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. It has been moved that clauses 1 through 8 be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? No? Motion agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clauses 1 through 8 passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Chairman, I would now like to move the Preamble.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Preamble be approved. Is ther e any objection to this motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Gavel] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Bill be reported to the House as printed.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House as printed. Is there any objection to this motion? No objection. Agreed to. The Bill will be reported to the House as printed. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of Appeals) Act 2016 was considered by …
It has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House as printed. Is there any objection to this motion? No objection. Agreed to. The Bill will be reported to the House as printed.
[Gavel] [Motion carried: The Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of Appeals) Act 2016 was considered by a Committee of the whole House and passed wit hout amendment.]
House resumed
[Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair]
REPORT OF COMMITTEE
BERMUDA MONETARY AUTHORITY (DETERM INATION OF APPEALS) ACT 2016
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Members. The Bill, Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of Appeals) Act 2016, has been approved. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections to that motion. We will move on to the next Bill. The next Bill on the Order Paper, my understanding, is the Second Reading of …
Thank you, Members. The Bill, Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of Appeals) Act 2016, has been approved. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections to that motion. We will move on to the next Bill. The next Bill on the Order Paper, my understanding, is the Second Reading of the Money Service Business Act 2016. I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister.
2366 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I move now that the Bill entitled the Money Service Business Act 2016 be now read a second time.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerPlease proceed. BILL SECOND READING MONEY SERVICE BUSINESS ACT 2016 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I present to you t oday the Bill entitled the Money Service Business Act 2016. T he Bill supports ongoing efforts to encourage new business development involving …
Please proceed.
BILL
SECOND READING
MONEY SERVICE BUSINESS ACT 2016 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I present to you t oday the Bill entitled the Money Service Business Act 2016. T he Bill supports ongoing efforts to encourage new business development involving payment ser-vices, money remittance and foreign currency ex-change. The proposed Bill will replace the existing 2007 and 2014 Money Service Business Regulations made under the B ermuda Monetary Authority Act 1969, with standalone legislation that contains all of the statutory powers applicable to other sections. As I mentioned earlier, Madam Deputy Speaker, this Bill has relevance to the overall comm unity, as well. Unlike the for mer one, this one has much more of a sort of retail flavour, because a number of people send money using businesses that fall under this legislation. It is also important for us to realise that, as an investments and international business sector, we are u nder the scrutiny of the world for anti - money laundering issues, and this will strengthen the anti-money laundering position of the Government and therefore strengthen our businesses and their ability to provide services to Bermudians, as well as to provide employment for Bermudians. Madam Deputy Speaker, Members would also be aware that, in an effort to support the growth of this sector, in 2014 the Government passed the Money Services Amendment Regulations 2014, which was a first step in updating money s ervice business fram ework to allow for better oversight as these types of businesses grow. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bill before this House today represents the second phase of the updating of our money service business legisl ation. The Bill provides the f ollowing key amendments: It provides a new definition of the term “ money service business. ” It also addresses matters relating to: • statements of principles, guidance notes and codes of practice; • licensing, insolvency, directions and surrender of licence; • accounts and audits; • shareholder controllers; • discipline, rights of appeal, notices and infor-mation warnings and investigations; • the requirement to file an annual certificate of compliance including, but not limited to, offences and penalties; • restriction and disclosure of information; • miscellaneous and supplemental matters i ncluding, but not limited, to matters related to offences, penalties and service of a notice on the Authority.
Madam Deputy Speaker, matters related to licensing fees of $5,150 and annual fees of the same amount remain unchanged. In addition, matters r elated to statements of principles, guidance and codes of practice are new for this sector, but not for other licence sectors. The Authority will be mandated to take into consideration any action which results in a breach of the code. Matters related to discipline, rights of appeal, notices and information, and warnings and investigations are also new to this sector, but amendments are consistent with other financial services legislation. Madam Deputy Speaker, presently there are two entities registered as money service business providers in Bermuda. By defining the actual services that money service providers will be allowed to perform, as opposed to the method of the medium used to del iver their services, the Bill will allow other pa yment service providers to come within the scope of the Act. This Bill represents a collaborative effort between the BMA, the Ministry of Legal Affairs and the Ministry of Finance. As part of the process to form ulate these changes, existing providers of these services were consulted and the BMA posted a draft Bill for public consultation in December of last year. Madam Deputy Speaker, I am grateful to members of the Ministry of Finance, the Attorney General’s Chambers, the BMA, and other industry stakeholders for their considered opinions that have assisted both the crafting of the proposed legislation and in the anticip ation of some of the practical implications of its impl ementation. Madam Deputy Speaker, wi th the proposed new Bill before us today, the BMA will have the add itional regulatory tools necessary to ensure that those who provide services in this sector are carrying out this business in a prudent manner. With those words, Madam Deputy Speaker, I ref er the Bill to the House and invite other Members to comment.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Minister. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 18, the Shadow Finance Minister. You have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Bermuda House of Assembly Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the Minister for his brief. I will say that I was expecting something a little bit longer and more substantive, given the very nature, or I guess I would say important nature, with which …
Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Bermuda House of Assembly Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the Minister for his brief. I will say that I was expecting something a little bit longer and more substantive, given the very nature, or I guess I would say important nature, with which this side of the House finds this Bill. The Minister, I guess, is correct insofar as that a lot of this is technical and it is moving items from regulation to primary legislation, which is required under some of the international regulatory regimes that we must adhere to. And f or regulating items such as this, we should have things in primary legislation as opposed to regulations from the Bermuda Monetary Authority. So in that measure, this is technical. However, it does signify an actual change, because it is not just moving t o regulations inside of the Act, it is broadening the definition of “ money service business. ” It is adding more flexibility to the BMA insofar as regulating these money services bus inesses. And it will basically allow and enable some of the things which we have discussed on this side of the House. Members of the House and members of the public, of course, would be aware of the Throne Speech Reply from the Progressive Labour Party in 2015, which spoke extensively on the matter of Fi nTech [financial technology]. Now although this is not directly related, I guess you could say directly related to FinTech—it does not speak to FinTech itself —these FinTech are the types of things that can come out of the money service business. And not getting into the technical matters or the clauses inside of the Bill, but there is a line in there that says, Any other business which involves the transmission of money other than payments. And that is something that could be used broadly in supply to FinTech. Now, as we know, Mad am Deputy Speaker, there are some actual FinTech companies in Bermuda already. And this is a space that can absolutely offer growth. As a country that has, as the Minister will say and as we like to think, a gold standard of regulation, it is certainly, without question, an opportunity for our country to possibly develop a niche. Why can we not, as we are one of the world’s risk capitals, also lever-age what we have, leverage the regulatory environment that we have, leverage the links which we have with vari ous organisations, whether the United States and/or Europe, to go ahead and develop a local tec hnology sector here, especially one that, I would say, is burgeoning with FinTech? This is something which we can do. And there are many types of possibilities t hat can come from this. So with this legislation today, it certainly is a step in the right direction. And I will be grateful to hear whether or not the Minister of Economic Development will speak, or when the Minister of Finance comes back, to see whether or not the Government has any ideas or thoughts to the promotion of this. It is not enough to give the Bermuda Monetary Authority the tools. The question is, What can come out of it? Are we doing anything with Bermuda Business Development Agency insofar as promoting these items? We have spoken extensively on this side not only about FinTech, but also we have spoken about technology and the jobs that can come from technol-ogy. We all know that technology is the future, and we know that that is where the f uture jobs will come from. Even in the question- and-answer session earlier t oday, we were speaking about STEM technology and the importance of those items. Technology is going to greatly change the way in which we operate. The amount of change that we have seen from technology thus far, Madam Deputy Speaker, is minimal [co mpared with] the change which we will see in the next 20 years. And I say that from someone who is heavily involved in technology and understands the types of technological changes that ar e going to be not only happening here locally, but that can greatly impact our industries. When we talk about FinTech and the type of items that can come out of it, we are talking about the transformation of where we will have complete banks that will not have a retail presence anymore, that will only be on mobile applications. When we are talking about the transformation of delivery of insurance products, we are talking about the pooling of risk, which can be done in a different way. There are lots of different advances, there are lots of different innov ations, there are lots of different enhancements that can come from this space. So I think that it is great that we are now putting forward a piece of primary legislation that is sa ying that Bermuda is a place where you can do money service business, that you can be regulated by a global regulator, a globally recognised regulator such as the Bermuda Monetary Authority. And I think it would be helpful for the people of this country not only to know the techn ical aspects, that we are just moving something from the Regulations over to a Bill itself, but it would be known, what is the Government’s v ision in this space? What is their view for promoting this techno logy? Or what is their view for promoting the use of this Bill insofar as developing business technology and developing more jobs on the Island, bringing more investment here? Are there types of things? Is there a vision to make sure that Bermuda can be a hub of FinTech, can take advantage of the Money Service Business Regulations, can look towards se tting up a global footprint here in Bermuda, taking ad-vantage of taxes? A lot of these companies operate globally. They operate in many different jurisdictions. And b ecause they are able to deploy their appl ications globally, they operate in many jurisdictions. So the tax a dvantages that our companies enjoy, our international companies, our banking companies, our exempted companies enjoy, they can also enjoy as a money service business operating from the Berm uda plat2368 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly form. So there are lots of different things that can come from it. So I think that it would be helpful to know the vision which the Government has. I think we have made it very clear on the Pr ogressive Labour Party side the vision that the PLP has, that we believe that FinTech can play a major role in providing jobs, in providing investment and in providing future economic development. We have spoken extensively about the need to establish a technology incubator in South Side. We have spoken about the need to make sure that we continue to i ncrease the technological capacity on- Island, and even simple things such as we have spoken about in some of our Budget Replies insofar as making sure that in order for Bermuda to become a centre for online bus iness, et cetera, we need to be able to make sure that we are doing work in our banking system. So then, we are talking about online payments that can be directly deposited to Bermuda bank accounts as opposed to having to go through the US bank accounts, and other items like this. These are the type of things that, as a country, we should be di scussing, and the Government should be telling the people the direction in which they want to go. The people have heard plenty from the PLP in Throne Speech Replies an d Budget Replies about the importance of moving forward in this aspect. But we have heard very little from the OBA insofar as what they intend and how they intend to promote this bus iness and something that can bring jobs and inves tment to the country. So I will take my seat with that, Madam Deputy Speaker. But I would hope that the Government would at least provide us a roadmap on how they i ntend on using these items and promoting these things going forward, to the benefit of the country. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are there any other Members? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 17. You have the floor.
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and good morning, colleagues. One has to be swift in order to make progress at the appropriate time; would you not agree, Madam Deputy Speaker? Madam Deputy Speaker, I was struck by the Honourable Finance Minister’s comment that Ber-muda wants to be, and wants to …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and good morning, colleagues. One has to be swift in order to make progress at the appropriate time; would you not agree, Madam Deputy Speaker? Madam Deputy Speaker, I was struck by the Honourable Finance Minister’s comment that Ber-muda wants to be, and wants to always be, and is currently, regarded as having the gold standard for regulation. It struck me because I would like to think, alongside that, the Government would also want to be seen as having the gold standard for opportunity. And it is easy to follow international directives and put pol icies and legislation in plac e that really have been i nspired elsewhere, and we just follow suit to create whatever nuance we need to put in place and create the regulatory environment that adheres to the wishes and the demands of international regulators. That does not require great insight. But I can see the Mini ster is happy to oblige the international regulatory env ironment. But a Government has a responsibility also to try to create a greater set of opportunities domest ically. And in the Honourable Minister’s opening r emarks, he said that this Bill would have much more direct relevance for the people. It does. But it seems to me, Madam Deputy Speaker, that we missed an opportunity to really provide a greater range of opportunities for the people of this country and for those who are involved in the business realm. So, yes, following the Shadow Finance Mini ster’s lead, we obviously support the Bill. But I would like to encourage the Government to consider some other areas that I fully expect would have been considered if we are looking at the money services bus iness in Bermuda. I recall at least one year ago, maybe two years ago, there was a comment made in this Parli ament about the kinds of things that could be done to enhance opportunities from a financial services standpoint. An d one of the very explicit comments made was that we do not properly embrace in our regulatory framework the ability for local business people to use PayPal accounts because PayPal ac-counts set up here, you cannot send any money to a local bank account. A PayPal account is viewed worldwide by new, small capitalised entities to get their business started up. So, Government, if you are really interested in helping businesses to get started up and create op-portunities, why not bring, in addition to the greater regulations demanded by the international community, some legislation for our PayPal accounts to be estab-lished? Right now, if you are not connected to the United States, you cannot open up a US bank account or you do not have some connections somewhere else, the Bermudian entrepreneur is impeded in that ability. Everywhere else, it seems, there is an ease of setting up a PayPal account and going into business right away, because you can accept credit card pa yments. You do not need to pay all these high f ees to the banks to get your PayPal system set up. So I would like for the Government to really embrace these kinds of opportunities. GoFundMe accounts —cannot get money, put into the banks. I guess, I do not know, maybe the Minister can speak to it. But i t would seem that one of the i mpediments has been the tremendous lobby that the current financial institutions have made over the years to prevent what they would see as a greater level of competition in the delivery of financial services. If Government had not been subjected to such pressure, I would welcome, I would like to hear that r esponse. But crowdfunding is a tool that has been used in many, many other places for small start -ups to get
Bermuda House of Assembly initial capital. The banks are not very creative. The banks are not very flexible. They will give you money for a car. But you go to them with an idea for a bus iness project, and they want to have it collateralised probably 500 per cent nowadays. So there is no innovation in the financial service sector. But if we br ought legislation to this House to provide the ultimate opportunities that exist els ewhere, then we could really say that Bermuda is moving toward a gold standard for opportunity, and not celebrate the gold standard for regulation. Regulation is easy. Creating the opportunity is required. And I hope that the Government will, at the very minimum, contemplate bringing such measures before this Honourable House. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members who would like to speak? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 15. Mr. W. H. Roban, you have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am happy to get up and make comments on this Bill and follow on the statement that the Honourable Acting Leader has already made, and my honourable colleague from constituency 17 has already stated. And I do believe that what they have …
Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am happy to get up and make comments on this Bill and follow on the statement that the Honourable Acting Leader has already made, and my honourable colleague from constituency 17 has already stated. And I do believe that what they have said, we hope that it is taken on positively by the Government in this. Certainly, we ar e supportive of this legislation and are very happy to see it, and frankly would like to congratulate certainly the Minister, his staff and even Mr. Cox at the BMA and the BMA for facilitating this legislation. Members on this side have expressed through repeated Throne Speech [Replies], as my Honourable Acting Leader has said. The Member from constit uency 18 has spoken to the need for innovation and moving forth with accepting new areas of technology like the FinTech industry and widening our ability as a country to take on these opportunities, which are expanding by exponential levels globally, and to ensure that Bermuda remains open and available for bus iness as we all are asking and are hoping and know that this Government has spoken repeatedly about. While taking on certainly legislation like this and any of the accessory activities and opportunities that may come is good. So we are happy to see that the Government has moved forth with this. I do think that the Honourable Member from constituency 18, i n particular, has made some val uable points that we now need to see what the vision is from the Government around embracing some of the wider opportunities this Act, namely, the Money Service Business Act, can potentially create. And what we have seen, cer tainly, over the last three years . . . But I am not seeking to point any fingers as such. But, you know, it is this Government that has been in place. But these are issues that, clearly, they are r esponding to that have been going on for quite some time. There have been many reports, historically, and I am sure the Honourable Finance Minister has read some of them at his time in the seat, that have talked about what we can do to expand the banking industry, financial service industry. There are reports that go back decades about these issues and proposals as to what we can do in Bermuda to expand the opportun ities. Well, we have moved from the need for necessarily the brick and mortar as just the only thing we can look at. There is now a technology foundat ion that has expanded globally that has itself created the opportunity to expand industry, not only expand industry for those who have a whole lot of money, frankly (and the only people who can start banks are people who have a whole lot of money), but there are also opportunities, as my honourable colleague who speaks for constituency 17 has said, for persons who do not have a lot of money to get involved and engaged in financial services. And one of the reasons why we on this side have spoken vociferousl y about FinTech is because that is what this is about. It is about creating opport unities for less than the 1 per cent who can set up banks anywhere they like around the world to get i nvolved with financial services and expand their own opportunities for t hemselves as entrepreneurs and as actors in the global marketplace. The Honourable Finance Minister, who sits for constituency 11, has spoken periodically on the issue of the financial services industry in Bermuda; specif ically about Bermuda’s being the g old standard, particularly about our being First World (although I would not ascribe to that terminology). That is kind of old - school terminology. We do not refer to First, Second and Third World anymore. It is either developed world or developing world, o r the Western world and the Southern Hemisphere. We do not talk First World, Second World . . . Third World is Cold War anachr onism. It is dead now. It is like dead language. But I understand what the Honourable Minister is trying to say.
[Inaudible inter jection s]
Mr. Walter H. RobanHe is trying to describe where he would aspire and like to see, in his role, where Bermuda should be. And that is okay. And the Ho nourable Minister has talked about essentially his lack of enthusiasm for the monopolisation of aspects of our financial services industry and industry in …
He is trying to describe where he would aspire and like to see, in his role, where Bermuda should be. And that is okay. And the Ho nourable Minister has talked about essentially his lack of enthusiasm for the monopolisation of aspects of our financial services industry and industry in general in Bermuda. And we get that on this side, that change is needed. So we endorse and support legislation like this and other steps to open up and not have certain aspects of Bermuda’s economy reserved for the few, that only the few can jump in and jump out, while the 2370 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly rest of us are sitting as spectators, waiting for the opportunity to get in. Or the only way we can get in is through certain pathways. Well, on this side, the pathways we are interested in promoting, Madam Deputy Speaker, are pathways to success. That is what we should be promoting in this House, pathways to success. So Fintech and other creative and interesting industries that are out there, ready for Bermuda, as we are connec ted to the digital world through a number of ways, through telecommunic ations, through a variety of platforms, and infrastructure that we have, which is considered to be world class. We can create the doorways of success for our persons who are entrepreneurs, who aspire to get i nvolved with these services. I can remember not too long ago, Madam Deputy Speaker, some of the other more traditional money service businesses, like Western Union and [others], were trying to come into Bermuda. Or things like peopl e changing money, like having a Cambiotype setup down at the airport. You know, all these little pieces that are a part of the wider financial services industry. I remember some smaller persons (not smaller persons, but people who are not perhaps as well-endowed in wealth) trying to get into this. And I remember there being . . . certainly, it seemed as if it was challenging for them to bring their ideas to the table and get openings of opportunity. And sometimes others got in who had more resources, even though the idea was coming from somebody who traditionally was not a part of the group that normally is in the game, as we can say. So it is clear we need to open up. And the Honourable Finance Minister has talked about his ef-forts to be tough with the banking industry. Well, my honourable colleague who sits for constituency 17 has also spoken about the inflexibility and lack of creativity that we are finding from our traditional financial services industry, how that is actually, perhaps to some degree, causing our economy to not expand and grow as easily as it should, because of their inflexible control over traditional ways of financing and traditional ways of ensuring that capital gets into the market-place. It is slowing entrepreneurship. It is slowing abi lity of some who have great ideas to get out there. If you cannot use PayPal, if you cannot use some of the other methods that are out there that are quite well known and used by entrepreneurs globally, if you cannot use those in Bermuda and everybody i s still (and I am going to use this term very liberally) imprisoned by the traditional financial market, it is going to slow progress and build up some of the frustrations that we know that many people out there have with getting into business, getting int o opportunity. And if things like crowdfunding, which is an innovation of the digital age, or even other ways of microfinancing . . . I know the Government has been working with that to some degree. But that is limited. And it is all attached to the tradit ional process of raising capital in financial services. It is tied to the banks, the traditional banks, which have their own criteria, I can remember, certainly as a member of a former Government, hearing things that surprised and shocked me about why cer tain people were not able to get financing, even though there were agencies in the government trying to help people to get their own home or to start a business. And because of some of the limitations within the traditional financial markets in Bermuda, people’s dreams were being lost and destroyed. And they took their frustrations in that out in different ways, sometimes at the polls. So I am in support of this legislation and in support of what has been brought forward. But Mem-bers on this side have asked what is going to be the vision behind this. How is the Government going to manifest some of the wider opportunities that exist out there that can potentially create jobs over time for Bermudians? That can potentially be a skill - development opportunity in reference to, if we can build a momentum of certain industry here, like we have done with insurance, like we have done with even hospitality in the past, that creates an environment where training can be naturally a part of the experience of our people. A nd as we know, when it comes to technology, it is not necessarily those who go to the big schools who are the innovators. Some of the great global innovators did not even finish college, and they are running the world now. There is potential for our young Bermudians, whom we have seen, who have engaged in coding, as my honourable colleague from constituency 21 has talked about. These are the potentials for greatness that we have if we are prepared to open up. So I would suggest to the Honourable Finance Mi nister, as we bring this Bill, the Money Service Business Act 2016 to this House, and it will hopefully pass, because we are in support of the Bill, that he go back to his drawing board with . . . perhaps there are other ways that he can deal with some of the limitations of our financial services industry. He does not necessarily have to talk to the banks. There are things that he as the Minister can open up in other places that take some of the monopolisation of the banks away from certain key services lik e those that were mentioned by my honourable colleague from constituency 17, so that other financial activities can go on without being dependent on our banks. Just by the Minister and the BMA working t ogether these opportunities can be opened up and taken out of the hands of the banks exclusively, so that some of our people out there who are looking with innovative ideas can get involved with. This is a start. And we congratulate the Government. This is som ething that we have talked about. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition, who is on his sick leave, as we know, has been passionate about the idea of Fi nTech and spoken about it in this House. Because he himself saw this as something that can be of opport uBermuda House of Assembly nity for Bermuda to expand online. Not just a PL P idea as such, but this can be a Bermuda industry and we can use with some of the resources we have available and the opportunities that we have here in Bermuda right now to make work over time to build jobs, build opportunity, build innovation, build pro gress for the country. I say all of that, being pleased with this Bill being brought here today by the Finance Minister, happy that the BMA under Jeremy Cox and people in his own Ministry have worked to get this here so that we can see what opportunities —we have a doorway. This is the doorway on which things can be walked through. So now we are looking for the Government to shape the vision, to shape some of the direction that others in the private sector can embrace and that we can support to see Bermuda move forward with what this Bill brings to us today. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to the Bill? The Chair recognises the Minister of Finance . . . Minister o f Tourism . . . Shadow of — Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Economic Develo pment.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy Speaker—Economic Development. There we go. The Member from constituency 22. [Inaudible interjections and laughter ] Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. No need to get into legacy issues here. Madam Deputy Speaker, let me comment very briefly. The Honourable Member who speaks for Finance on …
—Economic Development. There we go. The Member from constituency 22. [Inaudible interjections and laughter ] Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. No need to get into legacy issues here. Madam Deputy Speaker, let me comment very briefly. The Honourable Member who speaks for Finance on the other side raised questions about a favourite topic of his, which is FinTech. And I would like to assure the Honourable Member that we on this side are also following developments in this area. Fi nTech is obviously a very broad area. It covers a mult itude of sins. I think some of the more interesting things that are coming out these days, and I w ould also like to compliment the BMA on this, is there is a technology which I think all of us have heard of, Bi tcoin. And the underlying technology behind that is what is known as block chain, which is distributed database software which presents some ver y interesting opportunities. And I think Members on that side have touched on it very, very briefly. As I said, I would like to compliment the BMA, because they have already taken an initiative. And I will say that in addition to the BMA, the Bermuda Business Development Agency (the BDA) have also been looking at areas where Bermuda might be able to be competitive in terms of looking at new sectors that would provide physical presence companies here, or possibly other ways of using Bermuda as a staging point, whether it be actual boots on the ground or other ways of using the country. Suffice it to say, one of the areas that looks quite interesting, and it did evolve out of the Bitcoin technology, is what is known as block chain. And it looks like it may h ave broader application to a lot of different areas, not just banking, cryptocurrencies, but insurance and other ways where there are our contractual arrangements that need to be verified without being able to be manipulated. So, it is something that is c ertainly being looked at. The BDA, as we all know, has a concierge service. They have been doing independent research as well. You may have seen, Madam Deputy Speaker, that there was a press release, I think about two months ago, where the BMA was actually talking to a group that is involved in this area. And I think there are (I will just say) discussions underway. One of the things, though, that is very important here is simply talking about a technology or taking a build- it-and-they-will-come approach i s not suff icient. Having been involved in a number of venture capital funds myself going back a number of years, what is important here—and I think Honourable Members will understand this —you need to be able to cr eate an environment where some of these ini tiatives, proposals, ideas can thrive. Incubators have been one way of dealing with this. Certainly, they are prevalent in other areas. But I think from a Bermuda perspective, we need to make sure, as we have done with insurance and financial services, that you have the various elements present. One of the reasons that a lot of technology companies have grown up in certain areas of the United States, whether it be Silicon Valley with Palo Alto and Menlo Park, or Boston Route 128, or New York and Silicon Al ley, is because you tend to have a high concentration of the intellectual capital, meaning universities, and others and employees who are interested in this area, as well as a broad market for some of these things, as well, not to mention financing. So one of the things that I think we on this side of the House have been trying to do for a number of years is to create some of this environment. I do not want to get into it, Madam Deputy Speaker, but there are two pieces of legislation on the agenda which we will debate, hopefully next week. One is PIPA, the Personal Information Protection Act, and the other is LLCs which are part of this area, along with this par-ticular piece of legislation, which are starting to create that environment. Having been involved in technology myself and certainly researched going back a number of years, my sense always is that it is not Government that has the good ideas. I hate to say that about m yself and my colleagues. But what you want to do is create the environment that allows those ideas to take 2372 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly root and basically be able to nurture the seeds when they are planted. Obviously, you have to do some marketing as well, and the Bermuda Business Development Agency is suited and is certainly trying to do that, as well as outreac h. But I think the issue is, what kind of env ironment do you need to create this sort of thing? And it is not just one thing or two things. It needs to be broader based than that. And one of the nice things that Bermuda has going for it right now is a good reputation from a credibility perspective. It is not a place, as we have sometimes said, to hide capital. It is a good place to raise capital. So that is one of the ways in which some of this can be approached. But you have got to have the other issues there, credibility and the other supporting legislative and other initi atives in place to be able to do that. And suffice it to say, it is often easier to talk about this than it is act ually to get it done. But I would like to assure Honourable Members that we are trying to get some of this done. And with the assistance of the BMA and Bermuda Bus iness Development Agency and Members in this House, I think we are making some strides. But it is still a little bit early days yet before talking about an ything specifically. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 21. Mr. R. P. Commissiong, you have the floor.
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I heard the Minister, the Member from constituency 22, just speak. And I noticed that he talked about that it takes more than just talking about this. I am glad he recognises that, and so I am confident, now that we have …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I heard the Minister, the Member from constituency 22, just speak. And I noticed that he talked about that it takes more than just talking about this. I am glad he recognises that, and so I am confident, now that we have the enabling legislation to s ome degree being brought before this House. And when the PLP takes the Government within the next year or so, we can then move straight ahead in creating or re- imagining Bermuda in a way that we can turn our attention more towards diversif ication, or in real terms, maybe even starting the long-sought -after holy grail, which has been to establish another leg to our economy by putting in place the final touches by which Bermuda can become a Fi nTech hub, at least regionally, in Bermuda. Certainly, many, including some of the listeners out there, would have heard of things like peer -topeer lending, crowdfunding (as has been mentioned), cryptocurrencies, online gaming, the role that block chain has had in producing or enabling these platforms to achieve a degre e of security that probably has not been seen since the time that we have seen the rise of these sorts of technologies, which has given more confidence and allowed this industry to get more credibility within the larger financial services i ndustry and beyond as to its utility. So many of us have heard about these things. But when you heard the term “ FinTech, ” it was like Greek. Although you were aware of some of the com-ponents of which I just mentioned. Certainly it was Greek to me when I heard the Opposit ion Leader a couple of years ago start talking about FinTech, since which time many of us in the House on both sides have been learning about it. And just for maybe the benefit of your listeners, FinTech essentially repr esents companies that are part of an industry that uses technology to make financial services more efficient. It is one of the . . . I would not say ultimate disruptors in terms of the global economy, but certainly it is right up there in the top two or three because it has the power to transform banking and the provision of financial services in ways that we have not seen in a long, long time, certainly before our lifetime, some would even say ever. It is an industry that has grown exponentially, as mentioned, hundreds of millions of dollar s. And there is even a scramble now amongst the large metropols. London, the British Government made the major investment both in terms of from a regulatory standpoint, and in terms of money, to ensure that London is going to be at the forefront of being a global hub for FinTech. We know New York is on there as well. Why not Bermuda? One of the challenges we have in Bermuda, of course, is going to be that we are going to have to continue to bring down energy costs, because they use a lot of energy. And sec ondly, we are also going to have to ensure that the cost of broadband conti nues to fall. Those are two things that are critical. Certainly, however, I am glad the Minister talked about how the model of a technological incubator is one method by which we ca n jumpstart this process. I have a little bit more of an optimistic view of Gover nment. I agree with him about the fact that he is not too sanguine about the idea that you can certainly build it and they will come. But I do believe that Government has a cr itical role to play. Over this side, I think we come with more of a strategic vision around this issue, as evidenced over the last two or three Throne Speech [Replies] and r esponses to the Budget, where we have championed this. And we take a more integrat ed and holistic approach. That is why I have been very keen, and we on this side, about making sure that the next generation of our young students are going to have those techno-logical tools by which they are going to be able to not just survive, but thriv e, in this increasingly globalised and technologically -ised (excuse me) economy that is around here. Certainly, we want to know that once this i ndustry begins to take root here that our young people are going to be equipped to be able to get these types of jobs, which are very rewarding and lucrative and
Bermuda House of Assembly which we want to ensure Bermudians are going to be able to have first choice of. So, this morning is tied in. Without going too much into reflection upon the comments made about the role that career academ ies can play with respect to being umbrella’d within the school system, by which coding and software programming can be inculcated and taught to our young people. We think that is critical. Because like I said, we want to ensure that once these types of in dustries take root, our people are ready and in a position to benefit. I am not going to talk too much longer. We just want to acknowledge that we think this is the right way to go. And I am with the Shadow. I would just note this, and it would be somewhat humorous if it was not a little short sighted. I do remember that when . . . It would have been the last response to the Budget, I believe, that when we talked about FinTech and how that can be central to our strategic vision in creating more diversity or even a whole new industry for Bermuda, it was somewhat pooh- pooed—the R eply to the Throne Speech by the other side.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerWe are going to be careful on our language.
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongYes, yes, yes, yes. Yes. [Inaudible interjectio ns and laughter ]
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongI agree, I agree. And my apologies. But it was kind of ridiculed by a Member (I am not going to call his name) on the other side. I have just been reminded it was the Member for constituency 25. But notwithstanding that now, clearly people are starting to understand …
I agree, I agree. And my apologies. But it was kind of ridiculed by a Member (I am not going to call his name) on the other side. I have just been reminded it was the Member for constituency 25. But notwithstanding that now, clearly people are starting to understand that this i ndustry is for real, and it is not going to stop. They are even getting many within the established financial services industry and the banking sector globally tr ying to pre- empt their own ir relevance by investing heavily in this sector. So, it is a ministry whose time has come. Again, we are glad that we are going to see this enabling legislation being tabled today —not t abled today, but being addressed today. And we will support its passing. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to the Bill, Money Service Business Act 2016? I call on the Minister in charge, perhaps bearing in mind the time and suggesting we might move into Com mittee before lunch. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, …
Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members who would like to speak to the Bill, Money Service Business Act 2016? I call on the Minister in charge, perhaps bearing in mind the time and suggesting we might move into Com mittee before lunch. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, indeed. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I appreciate the Honourable Members’ input into this. I will note here that the BMA has a task group looking at FinTech for possible implications to our regulat ory framework. So, our comments there are certainly in sync with activities taking place within the broader government infrastructure already. I was interested in the comments on compet ition for banks. I know it was kind of a bit off the sub-ject. But I ju st wanted to remind Honourable Members that there is no lineup of banks wanting to come to Bermuda. This is a kind of fantasy that we have existed in, an alternative universe, in this country for some time. All right? There is no queue of people, of banks wanting to come to Bermuda. As a matter of fact, we are having to go out after foreign banks to come to Bermuda. So the paradigm has changed 180 degrees, say, from the 1970s and 1980s. So, we need to couch our remarks insofar as, you know, the need to get more competition in the banking and financial services area—I am on record agreeing with that. But nobody is beating a path to our door in today’s env ironment. And those are just the facts. Insofar as the FinTech thing is concerned, I do not know much about it, other than I have lived through, in my lifetime in banking, I have seen just amazing changes in technology. I was visiting Toronto not that long ago when I was . . . I used to work with CIBC in their main office. In those days, in the 1970s, the ent ire 48 floors of that bank were taken up by employees of the bank. Now, only three floors of that building are occupied by the bank. That is how much the bank has shrunk in terms of people working there. And the bank is like 10 times bigger now, today, than it was back then. But it is all being run by technology. So we have lived through an era of FinTech. This is the latest iteration of this, but it has been going on for some time. So, in any case, I welcome the Honourable Members’ enthusiasm for this. So I would move that we go into Committee, Madam Deputy Speaker, but perhaps we can adjourn for lunch and then come back in Committee.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThat is correct. Thank you very much. When we come back from [lunch], we will move into Committee. So if you would have your seat, thank you very much. But before I call on the Premier, there is a message that I would like to extend to the Members of …
That is correct. Thank you very much. When we come back from [lunch], we will move into Committee. So if you would have your seat, thank you very much. But before I call on the Premier, there is a message that I would like to extend to the Members of the House on behalf of Sir John Swan and family. All Members who plan on attending the funeral of Lady Jacqueline Swan on Monday, the 11 th of July, at the Most Holy Trinity, are asked to confirm your attendance to the Clerk of the Legislature, Mrs. Wolffe, by 5:00 pm today. And that will confirm seating. Thank you. The Chair will recognise the Premier.
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I move that we adjourn for lunch. 2374 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly The Deputy Speaker: It has been moved that we adjourn for lunch until 2:00 pm.
[Gavel]
Proceedings suspended
Proceedings resumed at 2:05 pm [Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Deputy Speaker in the Chair]
BILL
SECOND READING
MONEY SERVICE BUSINESS ACT 2016 [Continuation thereof]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Members. We r esume with the Bill , Money Service Business Act 2016. I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister, you have the floor. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I think we have finished with the initial remarks , and …
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerIt has been moved that the Bill be committed. Are there any objections to that motion? There are no objections to that motion. I call on the Member from constituency 20, Ms. S. E. Jac kson, to take the Chair. House in Committee at 2:06 pm [Ms. Susan E. Jackson, …
The ChairmanChairmanGood afternoon. Honourable Members we are now in Commi ttee of the whole House for further consideration of the Bill entitled Money Service Business Act 2016 . Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, you will notice that this Bill has 72 clauses , and …
Good afternoon. Honourable Members we are now in Commi ttee of the whole House for further consideration of the Bill entitled Money Service Business Act 2016 . Minister?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, you will notice that this Bill has 72 clauses , and I propose to move them in groups, if that is acceptable to you.
The ChairmanChairmanYes, that is acceptable. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Then, first of all , let me move clauses 1 to 5, which deal with definitions of what a “money service business ” is and interpret ations of “senior executives ”, “directors ”, et cet era, and duties imposed on the …
Yes, that is acceptable. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Then, first of all , let me move clauses 1 to 5, which deal with definitions of what a “money service business ” is and interpret ations of “senior executives ”, “directors ”, et cet era, and duties imposed on the Bermuda Monetary Authority to publish annual reports. So I would like to move clauses 1 through 5.
The ChairmanChairmanWould anyone like to speak to clauses 1 through 5? Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: So we can have claus es 1 through 5 approved, please?
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 1 through 5 be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Motion carried: Clauses 1 through 5 passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Now I would like to move clauses 6 through 9, and clauses …
It has been moved that clauses 1 through 5 be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to.
[Motion carried: Clauses 1 through 5 passed.]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Now I would like to move clauses 6 through 9, and clauses 6 through 9 deal essentially with the pri nciples of carrying on a money service business and how the BMA proposes to carry out certain aspects of licensing and supervisory functions of money service businesses. And the clause also allows the Monetary Authority to publish guidance notes on the application of the Bill and regulations under it. Clauses 6 through 9 deal with those matters of principles of the operation of a money servi ce bus iness. So I move those clauses, clauses 6 through 9.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 6 through 9 be approved. Would anyone like to speak to that? Deputy Leader of the Opposition.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you very much, Madam Chairman. Regarding [clauses] 8 and 9 regarding licensing, I guess I could wait until 10, but I guess if the Mi nister can give any idea if there are any directions that will be given to the BMA insofar as the licensing. Are there any …
Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. Regarding [clauses] 8 and 9 regarding licensing, I guess I could wait until 10, but I guess if the Mi nister can give any idea if there are any directions that will be given to the BMA insofar as the licensing. Are there any types of restrictions that w ill be put in place? Is there any thought of the type of restrictions that the BMA is looking at? Is it going to be open? Is it going to be a free for all? Is it going to be restrictive? What are those types of things? Of course I am assuming that they would have to meet the certain requirements that are spelled out, but apart from that, are there any types of things that we are looking for?
Bermuda House of Assembly One of the things that we always say, of course, when it comes to us in international business, we really is that want a certain level of company here. Is this the type of approach that the Government is going to be taking with the BMA in this instance, or are we going to look to cast as broad a net as poss ible to see as many types of these companies, especially when we are talking about FinT ech? I know that certain people have expressed i nterest to the BMA already, and the question is , Are we targeting towards anything specifically? Are we saying that you have to meet this certain level or not this certain level? Are w e going after any certain types of i ndustries or businesses or is it going to be restricted in the same way as we are looking at certain types of insurance companies or certain types of international companies and not just companies that are using Bermuda for a tax advantage?
The ChairmanChairmanMinister, would you like to respond? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes. I think the BMA certainly has some latitude, but I believe that they will be looking at money services businesses in the more traditional sense. What level of technology they use, I do not think is necessarily relevant …
Minister, would you like to respond?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes. I think the BMA certainly has some latitude, but I believe that they will be looking at money services businesses in the more traditional sense. What level of technology they use, I do not think is necessarily relevant to how they are going to approach this. But they are looking at money services bus inesses which can encompass a great arc of services. And I think that the BMA will have discretion as to what they require to give a licence, but I think that those requirements have less to do with the type of business as to the quality of capital and people , and whether that type of business is something that is good for Bermuda.
The ChairmanChairmanWould anyon e else like to speak to clauses 6 through 9? Honourable Member from constituency 15.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Madam Chairman. Just following on from the question from the Honourable Member who sits in constituency 18, and I am not aware whether t hese were specified in the Minister’s brief, but some of the requirements, I think based on what is in . . . and we …
Thank you, Madam Chairman. Just following on from the question from the Honourable Member who sits in constituency 18, and I am not aware whether t hese were specified in the Minister’s brief, but some of the requirements, I think based on what is in . . . and we are dealing with clauses . . . are we up to clause 8 . . . am I?
Mr. Walter H. RobanOkay, 6 through 9. In reference to . . . it says , and this is in clause 8 (2), “The Authority may license an undertaking to carry on one or more of the following money service business activities” and it goes through from (a) to (e): money transmission services; …
Okay, 6 through 9. In reference to . . . it says , and this is in clause 8 (2), “The Authority may license an undertaking to carry on one or more of the following money service business activities” and it goes through from (a) to (e): money transmission services; cashing c heques which are made payable to customers and guaranteeing those cheques; issuing, selling or redeeming drafts, money orders or traveller’s cheques for cash; carrying on payment service business; or operating a bureau de change. My question to the Minist er is, clearly there are businesses that already exist that do some of these services . Is this Act, because clearly this Act seems to be upgrading what was a regulatory . . . were just regulations to being legislation. Are there any additional requirements that are going to be specifically requested, such as, any sort of capital r equirements or any new things from what the current businesses are being asked for? Is this legislation g oing to be asking for additional requirements other than what is already in existence for some of the bus inesses that already do this sort of thing as outlined in clause 8?
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I do not know specifically, but I expect so. The way this usually works, in my experience in providing fi nancial services in Bermuda and also observing others, is that the private sector goes out and does something and then the Gover nment comes …
Minister?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I do not know specifically, but I expect so. The way this usually works, in my experience in providing fi nancial services in Bermuda and also observing others, is that the private sector goes out and does something and then the Gover nment comes in after them and tries to circumscribe what actually exists. And in doing so they may cause difficulty or inconveni ence to certain people who had already gone out there without, you know, in . . . they filled the vacuum already , and the Government tries to regulate that . And in doing so, no doubt there will be folks who will have to sort of ( to use an expression) up their game to come into compliance with this. So the answer, I think, is yes.
The ChairmanChairmanMember from constituency 15, you have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanYes. Again, going back to clause 8, and I thank the Minister for that answer, but what I am also interested in finding out is , since there was clearly collaboration between the BMA, the Ministry, and perhaps others in the devising of this legislation, and those who are actively …
Yes. Again, going back to clause 8, and I thank the Minister for that answer, but what I am also interested in finding out is , since there was clearly collaboration between the BMA, the Ministry, and perhaps others in the devising of this legislation, and those who are actively in the industry now, are there any technological upgrades that the Minister knows for a fact that are going to be requested from any of the providers, other than what they are providing now? Because, presumably , we are still confronted with concerns about money laundering, terrorism, things that go on within terrorism financing, and other types of clandestine financing, and trying to prevent the usage of these types of businesses for doing things that they should not be doing. And I just reflect on . . . and this is not necessarily something that is specific to these businesses. As we know some of the largest banks in the world have been recently fined severely high fines for carr ying on businesses which are so- called reputable, which are supposed to be upstanding, and these are 2376 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly so-called upstanding banks that have been pros ecuted in other jurisdictions for these types of activities. So, I ask if there is anything that the Minister would know specifically from his discussions with the BMA and others that, from a technological standpoint, software– wise or otherwise? And if m y question is too broad I accept that . Perhaps the Minister will come back later with more on it, not right in this, that per-tains to what is put into [clause] 8. Thank you very much.
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, I would just like to reiterate . . . the Honourable Member seems to be focused on technologies, it is not about technology ; it is about services. And if the technology ends up pr oducing new or different services as opposed to …
Minister?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, I would just like to reiterate . . . the Honourable Member seems to be focused on technologies, it is not about technology ; it is about services. And if the technology ends up pr oducing new or different services as opposed to the same services [but] better (all right ?), if they are new and different services , they would be regarded and reviewed by the BMA as to whether or not they are something that is appropriate. But I would say that this money service bus iness covers a broad spectrum of businesses, pote ntially anywa y, a broad spectrum of businesses . I take note of your comments about large financial instit utions getting in trouble. That is a given. And we know who they are, at least some of them. But the purpose of this is to try to circumscribe and regulate an industry in Bermuda that heretofore has not been totally unregulated, because we have had money services legislation already, but to more formally do so.
Mr. Walter H. RobanYes, a brief comment. I would perhaps just like to politely and I say this . . . to politely disagree with what the Minister has said in that this is about technology because it is only by virtue of the technology that the breadth of this business has been …
Yes, a brief comment. I would perhaps just like to politely and I say this . . . to politely disagree with what the Minister has said in that this is about technology because it is only by virtue of the technology that the breadth of this business has been able to expand. We only have 22 square miles . And the only w ay this is becoming such an important bus iness is because technology has allowed for persons all over the world to even engage with people here in Bermuda in this type of business. And certainly the Government has seen merit to create this legislation because this has expanded. Not because Bermuda is getting any bigger, but because the business globally is getting bigger and that is because of technology. So just that point of disagreement with the Minister , and I look forward to hearing more about some of what this legislation is supposed to bring. Although my focus has been on clause 8, I would like to go back to clause 7 just for a moment, if you do not mind, Madam Chairman, and this is “Codes of Practice.” Can the Minister advise if this code of practi ce is based on a sort of international standard of code, or is this something that was devised specifically from local legislation or is it something that was part of an international guide of code of practice? That is c lause 7.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards : I do not believe it is an international code of practice. I believe it is a code of practice that will be promulgated under the Act and Regulations as we are going forward. Yes, as I said, this Regulation does not , this Act does not regulate technology ; it regulates services to the public. The technology enables those services. So unless there are any other further comment s on clauses 6 through 9, Madam Chair man, I would like to move those clauses please.
The ChairmanChairmanAll right. It has been moved that clauses 6 through 9 be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Motion carried: Clauses 6 through 9 passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, the next section I would like to move is a big section …
All right. It has been moved that clauses 6 through 9 be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Motion carried: Clauses 6 through 9 passed.]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, the next section I would like to move is a big section with minu tia in it . I would like to move clauses 10 through 27, please. Clause 10 provides . . . this section deals with licensing, Madam Chairman. [Clause] 10 itself pr ovides a procedure for making applications to the A uthority for licences. An application must be accompanied by a business plan, application fee, and such other information or documents as the Authority may require. The other clauses in this section deal with the details of the licensing procedure. There are many details, but I am proposing at this point not to go through each one. Clause 27 provides for the Authority to object to an existing controller . . . oh, it has to do with controllers. Also the licence also has to do with so -called controllers , and controllers are shareholders who are seen to be in control of the business, have a big enough share to be a so- called controller of a bus iness. This is a concept that is prevalent throughout financial services regulation, also other services as well, I think telecommunications as well. And c lause 27 provides for the Authority to object to an existing controller who is considered no longer fit and proper. So, Madam Chairman, I would like to move clauses 10 through 27 which deal with matters having to do with licensing.
The ChairmanChairmanWould anyone like to speak to clauses 10 through 27? We recognise the Member from constituency 17. You may have the floor. Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Walton Brown: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I just want to speak to clause 19. I am just a bit confused about …
Would anyone like to speak to clauses 10 through 27? We recognise the Member from constituency 17. You may have the floor.
Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Walton Brown: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, I just want to speak to clause 19. I am just a bit confused about some of the wording there and I am sure the Minister can elucidate what I see as an apparent contradiction. How is it that if a company has had its licence revoked the Authority can still give direction when they no longer fall under its jurisdiction? I do not understand that, so I just need clarification. Also, I always get concerned when I see the level of fines that are being proposed that I consider to be quite small in comparison to the kinds of bus inesses that we are talking about. The Honourable Minister would know, because you are talking about businesses that are going to be generat ing millions of dollars in cash flow for example. These fines can really just be interpreted as a cost of doing business — so, I may break some rule, I might contravene something . So wo uld the Minister, at the very least, co nsider a wider range of fines to effectively operate as a deterrent? If your fines are too low there is no deterrent. And so those are my two questions. Is there or is there not a contradiction in the language? And how can you legally give direction to an entity that you no longer have under your legal sort of ambit to give direction to? And would the Minister consider, perhaps not now, but even at a later point, imposing a range of fines as opposed to these comparat ively low levels of fines?
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Well, I think clause 19 describes a situation where a licens ed undertaking has its licence revoked or they are forced to surrender the licence. I think there was a presumption that they want to continue to be in the business and they want …
Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Well, I think clause 19 describes a situation where a licens ed undertaking has its licence revoked or they are forced to surrender the licence. I think there was a presumption that they want to continue to be in the business and they want to get their licence back. And in order to get their l icence back they still have to deal with the Authority. So I think that is what this circumstance describes. And in order for them to get t heir licence back the BMA can prescribe—can and will prescribe —what they have to do to get their licence back. I think that is what this clause refers to because they cannot pr escribe anything for them if they are not going to be in the business anymore. I think that is kind of what you are talking about. If they get their licence revoked and they are no longer in the business , then the BMA cannot touch them when they go out of business or they go to sel ling groceries or something. But if they want to con-tinue to be in this business they are going to have to get their licence back . And I think the BMA here is in a position to [specify] conditions for them to get their licence back , and I think that is what this is referring to. Insofar as the fines are concerned, I think the fines are really incidental to the power that the BMA has to revoke their licence —either revoke or suspend their licence. That is the real power , because if they do not have a licence they cannot carry on business. So that is my interpr etation of this.
The ChairmanChairmanWould anyone else like to speak? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 15.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Madam Chair man. A couple of questions about a couple of clauses, namely , clause 11, and possibly claus e 14. A question as to . . . other than what is outlined, perhaps in clause 10 as to—clause 10 and clause 11, about the granting and refusal …
Thank you, Madam Chair man. A couple of questions about a couple of clauses, namely , clause 11, and possibly claus e 14. A question as to . . . other than what is outlined, perhaps in clause 10 as to—clause 10 and clause 11, about the granting and refusal of applic ations —are there any arrangements that are likely . . . and this may be just a . . . this may be not something that . . . I did not see this in the legislation but as just a part of how, perhaps, the Government and the BMA wish to shape this business in Bermuda. Are there any types of partnerships or arrangements which are not likely to get a licence? For ins tance, somebody who might partner with another bank , or someone who may partner with an overseas client or an overseas operator? Are there any arrangements when an application is likely to be viewed unfavourably other than certain local arrangements? I would like to know from the Minister, based on clause 11 in particular, what perhaps is the thinking behind those things . . . essentially about the direction they wish for this legislation to take this potential bus iness? Who are likely . . . are there any groups that are not likely to be seen as favourable to get licenc es if they apply? And that might apply also to clause 14. Those are my questions for now, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Minister, would you like to respond? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Ric hards: I do not think on principle there is any sort of preconceived set of notions particularly as it relates to partnering with overseas peo-ple, because I believe the people that are doing this business now are …
Thank you. Minister, would you like to respond?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Ric hards: I do not think on principle there is any sort of preconceived set of notions particularly as it relates to partnering with overseas peo-ple, because I believe the people that are doing this business now are already partnered with overseas people. So I do not believe, in principle, there is any sort of . . . something that will prevent them from getting a licence , just for starters. But I think that the BMA are going to use the principles of prudence and good record and a good business plan, et cetera. Those are the principles that the BMA are going to use as opposed to the sort of things that you outlined.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Member from constituency 17. 2378 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly Mr. Walton Brown: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I do not wish to be pedantic, but [clause] 19 is headed under protection of clients ’ interest s. And so I asked …
The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 17.
2378 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly Mr. Walton Brown: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I do not wish to be pedantic, but [clause] 19 is headed under protection of clients ’ interest s. And so I asked those questions of the Minister with concern to ensure that we have a framework to adequately pr otect the interests of the client s. The Minister will know that in the past we had one money service business —Spectron a few de cades ago. They took a lot of money from c lients and he [was able] to escape with the money. No money was ever given back and there was no legal recourse then, it seemed, to address it . And I would hate to think that we spent months and months putting t ogether legislation and we are not going to try to e nsure that if we have a similar type situation, or a Madoff-type situation, where someone just basically takes the money, that we have a system of fines that can be insignificant in comparison to the crime or action that is committed. And yes, there is legal recourse in other areas. But if we are looking at regulations to, as you say, ensure that we have this gold standard of regul ation, would the Minister not agree that these fines are very low?
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, I too recall that. Of course that took place under circumstances where there was no regulation at all, all right? Again, as per usual, the private sector is way out in front of Government.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberBut in a wrong way. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: That is right —in a wrong way. But it was not really in a wrong way so long as the business was operating in a normal way it was okay. But I think under the circumst ances that you described …
But in a wrong way.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: That is right —in a wrong way. But it was not really in a wrong way so long as the business was operating in a normal way it was okay. But I think under the circumst ances that you described if somebody sort of took off with the money then that would be fraud and that would be a crime that would be under that sort of legislation as opposed to this.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Member from constituency 19 . . . 15, sorry.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Madam Chairman. Under the same clause that my honourable colleague from constituency 17 raised— Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Nineteen? Was it 19?
Mr. Walter H. RobanYes, 19, thank you —the directions to pr otect client interests . Are there any . . . and as I said, I do not see this in the legislation as I have looked thus far, but for the activ ities that are prescribed in earlier clauses which the money …
Yes, 19, thank you —the directions to pr otect client interests . Are there any . . . and as I said, I do not see this in the legislation as I have looked thus far, but for the activ ities that are prescribed in earlier clauses which the money service businesses would carry on, are there any prescr iptions for liability to cover any potential losses that might be incurred by fraudulent cheques or even the business, as the Honourable Member spoke about , about businesses running off with any assets which might be the property of clients? As is in the banking industry now, I believe we provide some framework for deposit insurance or covering those sort of liabilities in the banking industry . Is this a clause that will require some level of coverage and protection for client interests from money service o perators, if it is not already required? Madam Chairman, just that question to the Minister based on clause 19 in this whole part of pr otecting the interests of clients . What sort of protections and things of that nature are going to be in place for the types of activities we expect to be handled by these types of companies?
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It is the normal course for the BMA, probably in guidance notes (and I am looking at my legal people over there) to require such companies to have insurance. I know that that is certainly the case in other financial services businesses that are …
Minister?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It is the normal course for the BMA, probably in guidance notes (and I am looking at my legal people over there) to require such companies to have insurance. I know that that is certainly the case in other financial services businesses that are licensed, that the BMA will require these pe ople to have a c ertain level of a certain type of insurance covering the sort of eventuality that you are describing.
The ChairmanChairmanWould anyone else like to speak to clauses 10 through 27? All right. It has been moved that clauses 10 through 27 be approved. Is there any objection? No objection. Agreed to. [Motion carried: Clauses 10 through 27 passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The next section, Madam Chairman, is just clauses 28 and 29 the penalties for a controller. And I described a little earlier that there are particular rules for people who are considered controllers of companies in this business . And clause 28 puts down …
Minister?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The next section, Madam Chairman, is just clauses 28 and 29 the penalties for a controller. And I described a little earlier that there are particular rules for people who are considered controllers of companies in this business . And clause 28 puts down some rules insofar as the BMA is concerned on who a controller is and certain penalties that will apply under certain circumstances. And that the BMA can also put restrictions on the shares of controllers of money service companies. So, Madam Chairman, I would like to move clauses 28 and 29 , please.
Bermuda House of Assembly The Chairman: Would anyone like to speak to clauses 28 and 29? It has been moved that clauses 28 and 29 be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to.
[Motion carried: Clauses 28 and 29 passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. The next section is also quite long, bu t I would like to move clauses 30 through 48. These clauses speak to the discipline that the BMA puts on licensed entities and the rights of appeal and the notices of …
Minister?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. The next section is also quite long, bu t I would like to move clauses 30 through 48. These clauses speak to the discipline that the BMA puts on licensed entities and the rights of appeal and the notices of requests for information by the BMA on said licensed entities and the investigative powe rs of the BMA, and the rights the BMA have for investigating and extracting information out of licensed entities. For instance, clause 44 establishes a proc edure for the issuing of warning notices. A warning notice is the initial step in an enforcement ac tion, follo wing an investigation into a breach. So this is the consequence of an investigation. If they find something wrong the BMA can issue a warning before a breach is established. Clause 45 establishes a procedure for the issuing of decision notices . A decision notice informs the money service business , or the person concerned , that the Authority has now concluded that it is appr opriate to take the action in respect of which a warning notice had been issued. It sets out the particulars of the decision and the reasons for the action, and also gives an indication of whether or not the Authority will publish the decision, and informs the institution concerned of its right to appeal to the tribunal. The A uthority is required to make a determination within 90 days after a warning notice is given , and if no decision notice is given within that period, it shall be treated as having discontinued the action. So that section deals with matters of that nature, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanMembers, would anyon e like to speak to clauses 30 through 48? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 17.
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Madam Chairman. I just wish to register my opposition to the provision that seems to be all -too-frequent and just accepted witho ut question that there always needs to be a lawyer or a barrister to chair one of these committees. I do not know if it is …
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I just wish to register my opposition to the provision that seems to be all -too-frequent and just accepted witho ut question that there always needs to be a lawyer or a barrister to chair one of these committees. I do not know if it is with the drafting people that they believe that they should give their colleagues a special place of prominence, but there is no inherent reason why every single time we create these commi ttees you mandate that a lawyer has to be the chair or deputy chair. You can have legal input and legal advice, but we must be truly exceptional in always posi ting that lawyers know better than everybody else. They have a particular take on things, they bring a particular perspective, but I would have thought in this arena you would want to have people who are profes-sionals in the area to provide the necessary leadership to assess any matter evolving. We saw it with a previous gaming matter , and so forth, and I just do not understand it. I would love to hear the rationale for this here. But surely we can do better and have a much more diversified set of chairs for important government boards. We just saw this week, Madam Chairman, that one of the most important inquiry reports to be presented globally, the Chilcot Inquiry into the horrific and illegal war against Iraq was chaired by someone who was a career civil servant, who put together a massive, de tailed report —2.4 million words. They were advised by legal minds —
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Walton BrownHave I r ead it? It is 2.4 million words! [Laughter]
Mr. Walton BrownSo Madam Chairman, we need to do better. All we are doing is reinforcing a notion in this country, which other countries do not necessarily follow, that lawyers somehow have to have a place of prominence and a place of privilege in dealing with such matters. We have an abundance …
So Madam Chairman, we need to do better. All we are doing is reinforcing a notion in this country, which other countries do not necessarily follow, that lawyers somehow have to have a place of prominence and a place of privilege in dealing with such matters. We have an abundance of talent. I hear the international business com munity say all the time, we’re bringing in all this intellectual capital. So, Minister, [since] you acknowledge they bring intellectual capital, put them in chair positions. Do not buy the argument that there always needs to be a lawyer to chair these com mittees. I know you are not going to make an amendment today —
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberHe might.
Mr. Walton BrownI know you are not. I know he is not, Madam Chairman. But I am hoping that , on reflection, in your moments of quiet reflection you will know that i t is not necessarily the case that a lawyer needs to be both chair and deputy chair. And I …
I know you are not. I know he is not, Madam Chairman. But I am hoping that , on reflection, in your moments of quiet reflection you will know that i t is not necessarily the case that a lawyer needs to be both chair and deputy chair. And I am not interested in what people might say has been the standard everywhere else. It is not the global standard. And if we live in a global econ-omy we need to adjust ourselves accordingly. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 2380 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly The Chairman: Thank you. Minister, would you like to respond?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I am quite sympathetic with the Honourable Member’s viewpoint, but of course—
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: —of course in this case that is why they call them “Learned Members” , unfortunately . But I have a note here that says tribunals need to interpret the law in their interpretation. You know, I sympathise with you. I sympathise with you, Member. But we will take that under advisement.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Would anyone else like to speak to clauses 30 through 48? It has been moved that clauses 30 through 48 be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Motion carried: Clauses 30 through 48 passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would now like to move clauses 49 through 56. Clauses 49 through 56 deal with the obtaining of information and reporting t o the BMA by money service companies, licensed money service compa-nies. It deals with various aspects of …
Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would now like to move clauses 49 through 56. Clauses 49 through 56 deal with the obtaining of information and reporting t o the BMA by money service companies, licensed money service compa-nies. It deals with various aspects of reporting. For instance, clause 51 provides for a right of entry into premises —this is also the BMA’s right of entry into premises occupied by a money service business ––by officers, servants and agents of the BMA. Clause 52 provides for the investigation of a money service business. Clause 53 provides empowerment to the A uthority to investigate suspected contraventions of fundamental requirements in the Bill. Clause 55 provides for the issue of search warrants by a magistrate. And clause 56 makes it an offence to obstruct investigations.
The ChairmanChairmanWould anyone like to speak to clauses 49 through 56? Okay. It has been moved then that clauses 49 through 56 be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Motion carried: Clauses 49 through 56 passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clauses 57 through 72. This ar ea deals with a potpourri of things which you might just put under the name of miscellaneous. Clause 57 makes provision for a licensed u ndertaking to, within four months from …
Minister?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move clauses 57 through 72. This ar ea deals with a potpourri of things which you might just put under the name of miscellaneous. Clause 57 makes provision for a licensed u ndertaking to, within four months from the end of its financial year, deliver to the Authority a certificate signed by an officer of the licensed undertaking cert ifying that the licensed undertaking has complied with minimum criteria. Clause 60 authorises disclosure to the Mini ster and to other authorities in Bermuda for the purpose of enabling or assisting them to discharge their regul atory functions. Clause 62 creates offences in connection with false documents or information. Clause 63 provides for the trial and punis hment of directors and officers of a money service business for offences committed by companies in ci rcumstances where such persons are implicated in the commission of an offence under the Act. Clause 64 prohibits the use of the term “a money service business” by persons not holding a licence. Clause 68 grants the Minister power to make regulations, subject to the negative resolution proc edure, for the implementation of the Act and to pr escribe penalties not exceeding $10,000 for any breach. Clause 70 provides that persons carrying on a money service business, under a licence issued under the Money Serv ice Business Regulations 2007, may continue to do so without a licence during a one- year period after commencement of the Act. And clause 72 provides for when the Bill comes into operation. So, Madam Chairman, I would like to move clauses . . . what did I say . . . 63 through 72?
The ChairmanChairmanFifty-seven. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clauses 57 through 72, excuse me.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Minister. Would anyone like to speak to clauses 57 through 72? The Chair recognises the Member from constituen cy 17.
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Madam Chairman. Just in relation to clause 58, and if you juxt apose clause 58 with clause 19 you can see the point that I was trying to make earlier , that clause 58, when Bermuda House of Assembly it comes to disclosure you make that a criminal …
Thank you, Madam Chairman. Just in relation to clause 58, and if you juxt apose clause 58 with clause 19 you can see the point that I was trying to make earlier , that clause 58, when
Bermuda House of Assembly it comes to disclosure you make that a criminal offence. You have fines of up to $100,000. So you criminalise the disclosure of information, [but] when it comes to the protection of the clients’ interests in this legislation it is not criminal and the fine is a maximum of $75,000. So I see that to be a sense of where the Go vernment is striking an unequal juxtaposition. In this legislation it seems that the clients’ interests seem to be of less value or relevance than a disclosure of i nformation. And again, I know there is going to be no amendment accepted. But at the very least can the Government acknowledge an asymmetry and express a willingness to try to rectify an imbalance to ensure that if you are going to criminalise the disclosure of information, there has to be something in this legisl ation tha t also criminalises the activities of companies that do things in a deliberate way that adversely affect the clients’ interests.
The ChairmanChairmanWould anyone else like to speak to clauses 57 through 72? Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Well, I am not sure I understand the Honourable Member’s point. But clause 58 prohibits the disclosure of information relating to the business or other affairs of persons coming into the possession of …
Would anyone else like to speak to clauses 57 through 72? Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Well, I am not sure I understand the Honourable Member’s point. But clause 58 prohibits the disclosure of information relating to the business or other affairs of persons coming into the possession of any person exercising functions under the Act. Clause 59 authorises the disclosure of the information in clause 58, if it is necessary for facil itating the discharge of the functions of the BMA. [Inaudible interjection]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Well, I am juxtaposing 58 to 59. Now I would like to move those clauses, please, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 57 through 72 be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Motion carried: Clauses 57 through 72 passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Ric hards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move Schedules 1 and 2. Schedule 1 provides the minimum criteria r equired under clause 11 [(2)] for the licensing of money service businesses under the Bill. For this purpose, the Schedule requires amongst other things for …
Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Ric hards: Madam Chairman, I would like to move Schedules 1 and 2. Schedule 1 provides the minimum criteria r equired under clause 11 [(2)] for the licensing of money service businesses under the Bill. For this purpose, the Schedule requires amongst other things for co ntrollers and officers of licensed undertakings to be fit and proper persons; it stipulates the composition of the board of directors for undertakings that are companies; and requires the business of licensed undertakings to be conducted in a prudent manner. Schedule 2 provides consequential amendments to four statutes, the Bermuda Monetary Author-ity Act 1969, the Anti -Terrorism (Financial and Other Measures) Act 2004, the Proceeds of Crime (Anti - Money Laundering and Anti -Terrorist Financing S upervi sion and Enforcement) Act 2008, and the Pr oceeds of Crime Act 1997 , and revokes the Money Service Business Regulations 2007.
The ChairmanChairmanWould anyone like to speak to Schedules 1 and/or Schedule 2? Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I would like to move those two Schedules, please.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that Schedules 1 and 2 be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Motion carried: Schedules 1 and 2 passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob ) Richards: Madam Chairman, before I move the Preamble I would like to say that there is a slight amendment to that Preamble. This is the Mr. David Burt amendment. Yes, at least he went this far. Reference in the Preamble to the “ Bermuda …
Minister?
Hon. E. T. (Bob ) Richards: Madam Chairman, before I move the Preamble I would like to say that there is a slight amendment to that Preamble. This is the Mr. David Burt amendment. Yes, at least he went this far. Reference in the Preamble to the “ Bermuda Regulatory Authority ” is a typo and it should be corrected to say the Bermuda Monetary Authority. That will be done by the Attorney General under the po wers given in the Computerisation and Revision of Laws Act 1989. So with those revisions, Madam Chairman, I would like to move the Preamble.
The ChairmanChairmanWould anyone like to speak to the Preamble with the amendment? [Inaudible interjection]
The ChairmanChairmanOkay, there is nothing . . . Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: So, Madam Chairman, I would like to move that th e Bill be presented to the House as printed.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House as printed, with the typo correction. Is there any objection to that motion? No objection. 2382 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly [Gavel]
The ChairmanChairmanThe Bill will be report ed to the House as printed. [Motion carried: The Money Service Business Act 2016 was considered by a Committee of the whole House and approved, with a typographical error corrected in the Preamble.] House resumed at 2:51 pm [Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshous er, Deputy Speaker, …
The Bill will be report ed to the House as printed. [Motion carried: The Money Service Business Act 2016 was considered by a Committee of the whole House and approved, with a typographical error corrected in the Preamble.]
House resumed at 2:51 pm
[Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshous er, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair]
REPORT OF COMMITTEE
MONEY SERVICE BUSINESS ACT 2016
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Members. It has been moved that the Bill entitled Money Service Business Act 2016 be approved. Are there any objections to that motion ? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerWe will move to the Bill on the Order Paper , and that will be item No. 5, the Second Reading of the Insurance Amendment Act 2016. I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister? BILL SECOND READING INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT 2016 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank …
We will move to the Bill on the Order Paper , and that will be item No. 5, the Second Reading of the Insurance Amendment Act 2016. I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister?
BILL
SECOND READING
INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT 2016
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I move that the Bill entitled the Insurance Amendment Act 2016 be now read a second time. Madam Deputy Speaker, Members of this Honourable House are a ware that Bermuda is a global leader in the insurance business. And to ensure that the insurance industry continues to be at the for efront globally it is necessary that a review of Bermuda’s insurance legislation is ongoing. Additionally, as international regulatory and supervisory standards evolve and become entrenched in best practices , the Bermuda Monetary Authority is required to continually assess its current framework and make adjustments where needed. Again, Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to emphasise that we are doing these technical things , not just for fun or for an academic purpose, this continues to be our effort to continue to have Bermuda at the forefront of our most vital industry, the industry that presents income, jobs, and opportunity for Bermudians. So this is vital for us going forward. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bill before us today is an example of these efforts to keep Bermuda up to date and current. These statutory proposals pr imarily pertain to enhancing our supervisory oversight of registered insurance managers. This Bill also i ncludes a new requirement for filing pertaining to anti - money laundering and anti -terrorist financing, and technical changes to the insurance regime. Madam Deputy Speaker, presently insurance managers are requi red to be registered with the BMA and there is a general oversight by that body. Ho wever, additional provisions of the Insurance Act will be extended to apply to insurance managers, specifically those regarding prudential standards and the filing of financ ial returns, which is in line with what is pr escribed by Solvency II. As well, insurance managers will now be obliged to report on changes to shar eholder controllers and officers of the insurance manager, and must maintain sufficient insurance coverage for its business in line with the minimum criteria i mposed on insurers. Madam Deputy Speaker, in addition to these proposed changes the Authority has consulted with industry on a new code of conduct for insurance managers, which it is intended to bring into force by this year’s end. Madam Deputy Speaker, with regard to our efforts to limit money laundering the Authority has enhanced its anti-money laundering oversight by requi ring that every insurer writing long- term business is required to complete the questions set out in a new schedule of anti -money laundering, anti -terrorist f inancing in relation to its long- term business, excluding any reinsurance business, and provide particulars of its gross written premiums on a consolidated basis for the relevant year. This information will be used to as-sist the Authority to assess the money laundering risks and use its resources to address such risks accordingly. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Authority has updated the AML and ATF guidance notes to comply with the Financial Action Taskforce (FATF) revised 40 recommendations , as well as to reflect the changes made to the relevant legislative provisions which were passed in Parliament in December 2015 and came into force on 1 January 2016. The guidance notes provide more i nformation and clarity on matters that arose during the supervisory process such as , interpretation and application of the AML/ATF legislation; risk assessment and risk rating methodologies; and the need for having an independent audit on at least an annual basis. Madam Deputy Speaker, other technical amendments pertain to the removal of the requir ement of the GAAP financial statements, which are no
Bermuda House of Assembly longer required with the adoption of the economic balance sheet regime put in place last year; amendments to the Annual Statutory Declaration of Compliance to be filed by insurers and managers; and the clarific ation that members of insurance groups include branches. Madam Deputy Speaker, Members are advised that consultation was carried out with the indus-try an d feedback has been taken into consideration as part of the preparation for these amendments. Overall the outlook for our insurance industry continues to be good. The changes that are part of this Bill before the Members today reflect our continuous effort s to keep our regime both effective and appropriate for our markets. In conclusion . . . I am getting rained on again—
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: You thought I was looking to heaven for guidance? No. I got a drop on my head.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberIt’s not a bird. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, it is not a bird. In conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank members of the Ministry of F inance, of course, the AG’s Chambers, the Bermuda Monetary Authority , and the represe ntative industry groups including ABIR, …
It’s not a bird. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, it is not a bird. In conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank members of the Ministry of F inance, of course, the AG’s Chambers, the Bermuda Monetary Authority , and the represe ntative industry groups including ABIR, BILTIR, and BIMA for their participation in the preparation of this legislative submission. So I invite Honourable Members to participate in discussing this Bill. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are the re any Members that would like to speak to the Bill entitled Insurance Amendment Act 2016? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 18, Mr. E. D. G. Burt. You have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, as with the prior Bills, we have been consulted. We have consulted with the Ministry of Finance and the technical officers there, so our caucus has received a briefing on this Bill and we are in support of it. It …
Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, as with the prior Bills, we have been consulted. We have consulted with the Ministry of Finance and the technical officers there, so our caucus has received a briefing on this Bill and we are in support of it. It is mostly technical amendments, yes, applying to insurance managers and, as we will see in Committee, it is very simple. The main parts of it are the Schedules that deal with all the new forms that have to be filled out and the volume that exist there. Of course it continues to be important that we maintain and keep up our, I guess you could call it, standing, and making sure that we are complying with all the various items which are required to remain a . . . the gold standard of regulation. And given the events in the United Kingdom and the European Union it is more important than ever that we keep up that desi gnation as it could be that Bermuda could stand to benefit as other countries may have to go through that process again, such as the Mother Country, the United Kingdom. That much being said , we are in support of this and look forward to some minor technical items in Committee. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAre there any other Members that would like to speak to the Insurance Amendment Act 20 16 Bill? If not, I am going to take this opportunity to extend my gratitude for those Members on both sides of the House who have come forward on the part of the team …
Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Insurance Amendment Act 20 16 Bill? If not, I am going to take this opportunity to extend my gratitude for those Members on both sides of the House who have come forward on the part of the team that sits in Committee, because without you the House will not function properly. So I am taking this opportunity to inv ite the Member from constit uency 17, C. W. D. Walton Brown, to sit in Committee. Thank you very much.
House in Committee at 3:01 pm
[Mr. Walton Brown, Chairman]
COMMITTEE ON BILL
INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT 2016
The ChairmanChairmanWe are in Committee. Honour able Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Chai rman. Mr. Chairman, there are 18 clauses. I would like to move them all, please. Starting with clause 1 is the standard citation. It cites the Bill as the Insurance Amendment Act 2016 . …
We are in Committee. Honour able Minister?
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Chai rman. Mr. Chairman, there are 18 clauses. I would like to move them all, please. Starting with clause 1 is the standard citation. It cites the Bill as the Insurance Amendment Act 2016 . Clause 2 amends the principal Act in section 6A to allow the Authority to be able to make prudential rules and standards governing reporting to be made by insurance managers. Clause 3 amends section 6C to provide that an insurance manager may apply to the Authority to have any prudential standards applicable to him modified or exempted, or the Authority, where it deems it appropriate, may modify or exempt an insurance manager for having to comply with relevant prudential rules. Clause 4 amends section 14 to make prov ision for: (i) the introduction of a fee for insurance managers to be exempted from complying with pr udential standards or to have modified prudential standards apply; and (ii) to clarify to the market that all 2384 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly annual fees to be paid by a registered person shall be applicable to the calendar year in which such fees are paid (that is, 1 January to 31 December of the year the fees are pai d). Clause 5 amends section 15 by clarifying that insurers and insurance managers must have regard to both rules and regulations in relation to the application and interpretation of requirements regarding the preparation and filing of statutory financial s tatements. Clause 6 amends section 15A to clarify the requirement for insurers to confirm in the annual dec-laration of compliance that they have met minimum liquidity requirements. Clause 7 amends the principal Act in section 16A by (i) repealing the requirement for the approved auditors to report to the Authority in relation to the preparation of additional GAAP financial statements; and (ii) by deleting the application of additional criteria concerning “material significance” under subsection (1)(e). Clause 8 is a technical amendment to section 17A to delete a reference to a repealed section which no longer applies. Clause 9 amends the principal Act in section 18A by imposing a civil penalty on insurance manag-ers for noncompliance with any duty imposed on them under section 17 or any prudential standard rule under section 6A. The fine to be imposed is $500 for each week or part thereof that the insurance manager is in contravention of the requirement. Clause 10 amends the principal Act in section 27B to: ( i) make provision for late penalty fees to be imposed on insurance groups who fail to pay pr escribed fees under the Act . This measure is consistent with similar penalties imposed on insurers . And (ii) provide that annual fees payable by a designated i nsurer on behalf of an insurance group are applicable to the 12 months ending the 31 st of December in the year in which the fees are paid; and (iii) clarify that branches are required to be listed as members of an insurance group in accordance with the provisions of subsection (7). Clause 11 proposes to amend section 30 of the Act to provide the power for the Authority to a ppoint persons to investigate and provide reports to insurance managers. Clause 12 inserts a new a section 30CA of the Act to require that insurance managers notify the A uthority of a change of shareholder controller or officer of an insurance manager. The reporting requirements proposed under this section take into account the nature, scale, and complexity of insurance managers and are in line with similar reporting requirements i mposed on corporate service providers . Clause 13 proposes to amend section 30J(5) of the Act by removing references to insurance managers. Reporting requirements relating to the a ppointment and cessation of officers and shareholder controllers of insurance managers shall instead be embedded under a new prudential rule (which seeks to impose enhanced reporting requirements on insurance managers). Clause 14 amends section 32(1)(b) of the Act to clarify that the Authority, when determining whether to give a registered person a direction, will take into account whether such persons are in breach of “rules” and “regulations” made in accordance with the Act. Previously only “regulations” were taken into account, however, as pr udential standard rules now apply the statutory alignment is required to be made. Clause 15 proposes to amend section 32A of the Act by clarifying the manner in which the BMA may direct an insurer or a designated insurer in order to safeguard the interests of policyholders or potential policyholders of that insurer, including directing that a breach be remediated. Clause 16. The Schedule to the Act is pr oposed to be amended to require insurance managers to obtain insurance indemnity cover relevant to the nature, scale, and complexity of its business. Clause 17 makes provision for consequential amendments to the Insurance Accounts Regulations 1980 and Insurance Returns and Solvency Regul ations 1980. Clause 18 provides for the commencement date of the Act. Those are the clauses from 1 through 18, Mr. Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been so moved, clauses 1 through 17 be approved. Is there any Member who wishes to speak to these clauses? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Therefore I move—
The ChairmanChairman[Clauses] 1 through 18. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: —move 1 through 18.
The ChairmanChairmanYes, 1 through 18. There being none, Honourable Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move that they be approved.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been so moved. Any objection? There bein g none, they are approved. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clauses 1 through 18 passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move the Preamble please.
Mr. E. David BurtPoint of order. Bermuda House of Assembly The Chairman: Point of order?
Mr. E. David BurtThe Schedules, Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Schedules. [Inaudible interjection]
The ChairmanChairmanOh, good. [Inaudible interjection]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Chairman, I move that Schedules 1 and 2 form part of the Bill.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been so moved. The Chair recognises the Honourable Acting Opposition Leader and Opposition spokesperson for Finance.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you very much, Mr. Chai rman. On Schedule 1, Minister, I am just wondering if there is a typo. On Schedule 1 it goes . . . if we go to page 20 of the Bill, which is Table II where it is talking about AML/ATF on item 16 …
Thank you very much, Mr. Chai rman. On Schedule 1, Minister, I am just wondering if there is a typo. On Schedule 1 it goes . . . if we go to page 20 of the Bill, which is Table II where it is talking about AML/ATF on item 16 under “Employee Liability” [sic] it says, “to comply with AML/ATF/AFT obligations.” I am not sure if that is a typo, something extra that may have been added in there, or maybe it is something that I do not know. And if it is something that I do not know, can you inform me what “AFT” may stand for? Because it does have “ATF” and I am just wondering if it was something extra that was added there.
The Chai rman: Thank you, Honourable Member. Minister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I am sure it is supposed to be Anti -Terrorist Financing, so ATF – [Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: —“ATF.”
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It should be “ATF.”
Mr. E. David BurtBut “ATF” is there already. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: So there is no “AFT,” where are you seeing “AFT”? What page are you looking at?
Mr. E. David BurtI am sorry. The C hairman: The Chair recognises the Honourable—
Mr. E. David Burt—I am on, for the Minister’s benefit, it is page 20. And on page 20 under “Employee Liability” [sic] on Table II it i s item number 16. And item number 16 says, “ . . . to report suspicious transactions and other actions to comply with AML/ATF” — and …
—I am on, for the Minister’s benefit, it is page 20. And on page 20 under “Employee Liability” [sic] on Table II it i s item number 16. And item number 16 says, “ . . . to report suspicious transactions and other actions to comply with AML/ATF” — and then —“AFT obligations.” We are all familiar with AML and ATF, it just seems as though it just might have been something that got added in somehow. And if it is not, if it is supposed to be there, I do not know what “AFT” stands for, so I would like to be aware.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Honourable Member. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The mind boggles. Just one second. The Chairm an: The Minister is seeking clarification. [Pause]
The ChairmanChairmanMinister? AMENDMENT TO SCHEDULE 1 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Chairman, I move that that AFT be deleted from item number 16 on page 20 of that Schedule.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been so m oved. Are there any objections? There being none, that amendment is a pproved. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Amendment to Schedule 1 passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move the Schedules as amended.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Schedules be approved as amended. Are there any objections? Approved. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Schedules 1 and 2 passed as amended.] 2386 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move that the Bill be reported …
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House as amended. Are there any objections? Approved. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Insurance Amendment Act 2016 was considered by a Committee of the whole House and pass ed as amended.] House resumed at 3:14 pm [Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, …
It has been moved that the Bill be reported to the House as amended. Are there any objections? Approved. [Gavel]
[Motion carried: The Insurance Amendment Act 2016 was considered by a Committee of the whole House and pass ed as amended.]
House resumed at 3:14 pm
[Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair.]
REPORT OF COMMITTEE
INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT 2016
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Members. It has been moved that the Bill entitled Insurance Amendment Act 2016 be approved with the typo amendment . Are there an y objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerNext on today’s Order Paper we have Bill No. 6 which is the second reading of the Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act 2016. I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister, you have the floor. BILL SECOND READING CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2016 Hon. E. …
Next on today’s Order Paper we have Bill No. 6 which is the second reading of the Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act 2016. I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister, you have the floor.
BILL
SECOND READING
CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2016
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Today must be my lucky day.
Mr. E. David BurtWhy? Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I would like to move the Bill entitled the Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act 2016 to have it now read a second time.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerPlease proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker, this Bill seeks to amend the Customs Tariff Amendment Act 1970 to provide relief from customs duty in respect of the St. George’s Marina Development Project. The measures of the Bill affect the Fifth and Sixth Schedules of …
Please proceed.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker, this Bill seeks to amend the Customs Tariff Amendment Act 1970 to provide relief from customs duty in respect of the St. George’s Marina Development Project. The measures of the Bill affect the Fifth and Sixth Schedules of the principal Act. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Government has authorised the Corporatio n of St. George’s to enter into an agreement with the St. George’s Harbour Marine Group to progress the development of a marina for the town of St. George’s. The desire for a marina in St. George’s relates principally to retention of its UNESCO World Herit age status and is part of deve loping a more sustained financial model for the Corpo-ration of St. George’s. The planned St. George’s Marina is expected to reduce the impact from storm surge and provide a general revitalisation of economic activity in the Old Town. An ancillary benefit is expected to be that the St. George’s Marina and the St. George’s Resort Development are likely to compl ement one another. Madam Deputy Speaker, in support of the St. George’s Marina Development Project the Bill i ncludes a new end use relief for goods imported for incorporation in the new St. George’s Marina structure and facilities. The Bill further includes a new temporary importation relief for equipment temporarily i mported for use in developing the new St. George’s Marina structures and facilities. Madam Deputy Speaker, those two new duty reliefs for the St. George’s Marina are part of an ong oing effort on the part of Government to assist the Corporation of St. George’s with schemes that help the Corporation achieve revenues commensurate with its needs. Honourable Members may recall that three years ago the 1Corporation of St. George’s and its Royal Heritage Fund and Levy Act 2013 came into operation allowing the Corporation of St. George’s to collect a levy of 25 cents per litre on hydrocarbon products imported via the Ship Terminal at the Oil Docks. Although the UNESCO Levy has been a great help to the Corporation of St. George’s adding to revenue streams such as wharfage and dues on air freight, the Government seeks to further assist the Corporation of St. George’s to enhance its revenue raising capacity through appropriate duty reliefs and other measures not forming part of this Bill. The Government’s ultimate aim is to reduce the Corporation of St. George’s need for any future Government funding. I will comment on further details on the proposed duty relief in Committee. I invite Honourable Members to participate in discussions. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
1 Corporation of St. George’s (UNESCO World Heri tage Fund and Levy) Act 2013
Bermuda House of Assembly The Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act? The Chair recognises the Opposition Shadow Finance Minister from constituency 18. You have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the Minister for his brief. I note the understanding about what this is for; I guess the question from our side is just mainly, what are the plans for the St. George’s Marina? How advanced are they? What …
Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the Minister for his brief. I note the understanding about what this is for; I guess the question from our side is just mainly, what are the plans for the St. George’s Marina? How advanced are they? What is it? I mean, this is not something that we have heard much about and, I guess, hopefully maybe the person who speaks for tourism in this House or the person who represents that constituency might be able to speak on it , or maybe the person who repr esents the municipalities in thi s House, Dr. Gibbons, might be able to shed some light on what we are actually giving an approval for. Because the only thing we hear about is a marina in St. George’s . And that is fine. But the question is, is there planning position? Are we moving forwar d? Or is this just something that is just being done in a way to sweeten the pot? Has there been anything that has actually been contracted, anything that has been signed? What is the progress to date? In principl e there is no objection. Of course, we sup port anything that we can to assist with development in Bermuda and development inside of the Old Town. So it is something that I am sure would be welcome. I am sure that from just a philosophical perspective I think that a marina is a much better thing to have than a cruise ship pier or trying to dig out a channel and build a cruise ship pier . But that is just myself . . . oh, he is there! He has woken up! All right. We might hear from the Junior Minister of Tourism. But that is just my perspective, but i t would be good to hear what details, if any, there are for this pr oject and at what stages in development it may be, or is this just something that is being done in advance so that there may be some possibility of items going forth. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act? The Chair recognises the Junior Minister from constituency 1. Hon. Kenneth (Kenny) Bascome: Thank you , Madam Deputy Speaker. I am a little perplexed to hear that Honourable Member state …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act? The Chair recognises the Junior Minister from constituency 1.
Hon. Kenneth (Kenny) Bascome: Thank you , Madam Deputy Speaker. I am a little perplexed to hear that Honourable Member state that he is not aware of what is going on with this marina. This is something that has been talked about now for the last six to seven years.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Kenneth (Kenny) Bascome: Well, that was under your administration. I cannot answer for that. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would just like to say to the Honourable Minister at this particular time this is something that has been in the pipeline for a number of years. I am just hopeful that all the Members will come on board and support this, as we, as the Government —the One Bermuda Alliance— endeavour to revitalise the World Heritage Site of the Town of St. George, not the Town of St. George’s , but the Town of St. George. The Parish is St. George’s, the Town is St. George. This is something that has been talked about for a number of years. I believe we are on our way. I would get into the aspect, the gentleman is talking about the Town Cut Channel, but we will not go there, Madam Deputy Speaker. But I still believe that this is something that will help us —the One Bermuda All iance—to assist the Town of St. George to revitalise and take its rightful place in the economic wellbeing of Bermuda. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are there any other Members? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 15, Mr. W. H. Roban. You have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I just wish to follow my honour able colleague and Acting Leader who speaks in constituency 18. The support for efforts through this Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act, I believe?
Mr. Walter H. RobanTo provide some support for St. George’s , and particularly as it pertains to its . . . it seems it is focused on ensuring the ultimate develo pment of a marina. Certainly the statement from the Honourable Member who sits for constituency 1, who is the Junior Minister for …
To provide some support for St. George’s , and particularly as it pertains to its . . . it seems it is focused on ensuring the ultimate develo pment of a marina. Certainly the statement from the Honourable Member who sits for constituency 1, who is the Junior Minister for Tourism, that this is an idea that has been worked on for a number of years is certainly correct. As someone who once sat as Chairman of the Marine Board back in the mid- 2000 s—I can go back that far — that this idea for a marina for St. George’s is nothing new. In fact, Madam Deputy Speaker, I can r emember the former administration and a former Mini s2388 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly ter of Transport going to St. George’s and talking to the St. George’s community and those who are of i nfluence in St. George’s ( if I can use that phrase) about the possibility of a marina and the interest in the development of a marina in St. George’s in alternative to the cruise ship situation. And the reality of the cruise ship situation is this, just to restate it for the public consumption: Due to the nature of the St. George’s Harbour and the Town Cut and the dimensions of the Cut, over the years it evolved that [there are few] ships available that can fit through the Cut. I think that has pretty much been an explanation that has been given to the public for many years. In fact, of arguably the nu merous ships that are around the world with the numerous cruise lines — some that venture here to Bermuda and some that venture all over the place —the dimension of ships that are available that could come through the Town Cut is literally down to maybe less than 30. That is globally, that is not just in the Atlantic Ocean itself . That is globally, all right? And that is information that comes from not only what our own Government knows, and as a former Minister of Transport I was certainly confronted with thi s information, as a former Chairman of the Marine Board I was also confronted with this i nformation. And I was also confronted with information back as far as 1999 that from the experts globally who deal with the building of ports and the development of ports around the world, that there was an evolution of the size of ships. And if the ships that we were getting in the late 90’s which came into Town Cut, and we had al-most like a three port strategy back then, Bermuda was going to be challenged in that the advancement of the cruise industry was moving toward Panamax and post -Panamax ships. So here we are now in the mid- 2000s . . . we are here now in 2016 and that has happened. And that has created a challenge for finding dedicated ships, there may be the oc casional caller of certain lines that can come into St. George’s , and I am sure that they are benefiting from that now , and that is good for St. George’s. But the reality was, to have a dedicated cruise ship that will stay there for that time was a challen ge. It was a challenge even to maintain that in prior administrations. So the idea of St. George’s becoming a yacht destination, as it had already had the tradition of being a yacht destination as Members will know, many yachts used to come into St. George’s and dock and they have a thriving industry for the more professional yachts and a lot of traffic, a lot of business, many res-taurants, and many in the community benefit from that. That has evolved well but there was the potential, it was thought, that S t. George’s could perhaps have a whole luxury component of its yachting trad ition there and have a luxury yacht port. Well, the reality is this : The St. George’s community essentially rejected the proposal of the Government at that time and I know, as Chairman of the Marine Board, this is what happened. And it is unfortunate because it is likely, in fact . . . why did they reject it? I think one would need to speak to those persons who had influence in St. George’s at that p eriod of time to find out. Certainly the Government of the day brought that proposal, there were people in line who were prepared to begin to finance such a project , but . . . and since then, unfortunately, those who have come to St. George’s with proposals —and I have seen some of the pr oposals in the past —for whatever reason, Madam Deputy Speaker, those pr oposals never came to fruition. So St. George’s has, unfortunately, suffered. But my point is that this could have been dealt with a long time ago if St. George’s —and I am not speaking about all the people, but those who had influence in St. George’s —had been prepared to take on this pr oposal some years ago. And so, I say all that to give some context to the history of the fact that this has been on the table for quite a long time. We w elcome the prospect that such a port can be brought to St. George’s , and if this Bill and the other measures that the Government is going to do will assist St. George’s with getting this sort of investment , then that is a good thing. But it is a long time coming. I only wish that the wise heads of St. George’s many years ago had accepted the pr oposal then. Then we would not be having this conversation and this Government would not have been challenged to find other things to bring to St. George’s that are going to assist with their situation. We welcome this. I look forward to seeing whatever marina develops , because I do believe that St. George’s is an outstanding place for a marina. I have seen marinas around the world of this nature in small, sort of, yac hting sort of ports and sort of harbours . And I will contend to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, St. George’s could be a global destination for such an opportunity. I sincerely believe that because of what I have seen elsewhere, that St. George’s has everything— its vistas, its picturesque features, the history, everything. With a luxury yacht port and possibly their proposal also for a boutique hotel I know in the past, whether that is going to come forth I do not know, but I hope that whatever the Government is doing, it helps this particular project come to fruition because I believe that St. George’s can greatly benefit from such an effort. But I say this : it is not because of lack of e ffort—perhaps lack of foresight by some others in this country and in St. George’s in particular, but not lack of effort by both private and public partners that this has not happened. So I welcome, my colleagues in St. George’s getting this opportunity. If this Customs Tariff Amend-ment (No. 2) Act is going to facilitate that , it is a wo nderful thing.
Bermuda House of Assembly And thank you very much for the time for my comments, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill, the Customs Tariff Amendment Act? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 17. You have the floor.
Mr. Walton BrownThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This is an important step to take if we are really going to get some further development and advancement in St. George’s. And I am using the correct nomenclature, St. George’s, the Parish. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Government has approved the Town of St. George …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This is an important step to take if we are really going to get some further development and advancement in St. George’s. And I am using the correct nomenclature, St. George’s, the Parish. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Government has approved the Town of St. George initiative, so it has to mean that they have seen the plan, they approved the plan. My question for the Minister, and if the Minister cannot hear I am hoping that one of his colleagues will present him with this question, does the proposed development of the marina also include any sort of a lodging facility? I am not sure if the person who had initially planned to develop the marina is still t he guy in the picture, but I spent many, many hours talking to this individual years ago. I played a lot of poker with him as well . So, I do not know if he is the still the guy i nvolved in it. But his plan was to build a boutique hotel as an accompaniment to the development of the m arina. I have received information that there will not be a boutique hotel, but that there will potentially be a lodging for the sea- weary sailors. So I just want to know if the plan contains a lodging facility, because a lodgin g facility is altogether different than a boutique hotel. And if the Honourable Member from St. George’s (who is not in his seat ) really has a focus on getting the right sort of development because this is a World Heritage Site , I would like to think that we would want something more than merely a lodging facility but something that would greatly enhance the beauty and history of the Town of St. George. So I need an answer ; I would like an answer to that question. Does the current plan that this Government has approved contain either a lodging facility (a sailor’s home much like the one across from The Robin Hood) , or is it a boutique hotel? Those are two very different enterprises. Secondly, since the Government has taken time and its human resources to dev elop this concession order, and we are spending time in Parliament to debate it, can the Government give any assurance that they have a great sense of comfort , or a sufficient sense of comfort , that the money is there to do it? B ecause if the money is not there or they do not have comfort that the money is there, they why are you bringing it? Because we have been through this many, many times before and nothing ever materialises. So all I want to know is whether or not the Government is comfortable that th e money is there, the money is there . Because I know the original person, and like I said I do not know if he is still about, he was having a very hard time raising the money to undertake the development and that was one of the main stumbling blocks. So c an the Government answer the question as to whether or not they have a measure of comfort that financing has in fact been presented to them? Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Customs Tariff Amendment Act? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13, Mr. D. V. S. Rabain.
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I think we can see where we are going with this and I, following along with my colleagues, am very interested to know where exactly this particular project is. And as the Junior Minister did articulate, it has been going on for …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I think we can see where we are going with this and I, following along with my colleagues, am very interested to know where exactly this particular project is. And as the Junior Minister did articulate, it has been going on for some time. Based on the developer, who my colleague Mr. Brown spoke to, it has been going on since 2012 , that he has been trying to get this project up and going. But coming back to Mr. Burt’s question of where it is, is a valid question. It is a valid question because of statements that were made in the previous year (in 2015) . In 2015, Madam Deputy Speaker, we had statements coming from the Government, from the Minister that was in charge of that Ministry at one point, saying that all agreements had been signed and we are finally moving forward, and legislation would be coming forthwith, meaning at the beginning of this year. We are halfway through the year and we still have not seen anything. The developers have always stated that they wanted to get this thing up and running by the summer of 2015. We are now in the summer of 2016. The intent of it was to have it in place by America’s Cup to try and reap some of those benefits. And the way it is looking, we have not seen anything move forward or coming forward that is giv ing us any sort of indication that that is even remotely going to happen, Madam Deputy Speaker. So I think it is a valid question to ask, where exactly is the planning with this? Where is it exactly , because we have had statements that say it is coming? We have had statements saying deals have been signed. As of last October there was an announc ement by the Government , Finally agreements have been signed between the developer and the Corpor ation of St. George’s. So if they have signed som e2390 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly thing, if there are agreements in place, surely there is some sort of plan t hat we can speak to. And if we are bringing legislation to provide customs relief for this, what are we providing customs relief for? What is there? And I think not only does this House deserve answers to that, but the public in general do too, because th ey are hearing these stat ements saying that deals have been signed, things are moving forward, and we should begin work . We have had the Mayor of St. George’s confidently state that work should begin in the early part of 2016 beginning with a breakwater and yacht berths to be constructed and hopefully in place by America’s Cup. But we are now in the middle of 2016 and we have yet to see anything moving this project forward. Again I stress, I believe that we are doing a disservice to not only this Honourabl e House but, in particular, the constituents of St. George ’s who are looking forward to this and especially thinking it should be on its way. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much, Member. The Chair now recognises the Minister from constituency 22, Dr. the Hon. E. G. Gibbons. You have the floor. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, let me provide at least a certain amount of clarification. I know …
Thank you very much, Member. The Chair now recognises the Minister from constituency 22, Dr. the Hon. E. G. Gibbons. You have the floor.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, let me provide at least a certain amount of clarification. I know my ho nourable colleague the Minister of Finance will wrap up at the end and provide some additional details in terms of where the project is specifically. But let me say that I think we are all aware that there have been a number of projects over the years that have arisen and in some cases sadly fallen in St. George’s. Some of them had lodging involved, some of them did not. Just for the sake of clarity , this particular project does not have lodging involved. I think it is a different developer than the one the Honourable Member Walton Brown was referring to, but I am not absolutely sure. But it just sounds like a different project. The Customs Tariff Act is essentially providing customs import duty relief on the capital goods that will be coming in to build what is essentiall y a floating marina down there. My understanding also is that there are going to be a couple of phases to this . I think we are at a point now where this is obviously a good project for the Town of St. George and good for the Parish of St. George’s as well. I think we are all aware that St. George’s and the town have done fairly well over the years as a consequence of having visiting yachts. It is a great harbour, it is a great place to visit, I think people like the ambience down there. And I think this wi ll provide some additional not only reinforcement, but additional capacity for the town to be able to benefit further from this. I think it is fair to say that the America’s Cup in 2017 has been a catalyst for this. It has provided some additional wind beneath the wings, as it were, because at this point we are looking at almost a r ecord number of super yachts coming here in 2017. We are at probably over 90 of them at this point and we simply do not have the capacity without St. George’s and possibly the Morgan’s Point Marina to be able to handle that number. In addition we are also getting the sense that we could have well over 300 other yachts coming in as well. So I think the timing on this in many respects could not be better. I think this is a good ex ample of a public/private partnership. By “public” I mean the Corpor ation of St. George. They will have skin in the game, as they say, they will have part ownership of this. And part of the contribution and the assistance the Government is giving is throug h this duty relief because it will help facilitate , essentially , the construction of this at a lower cost than it would be normally if they had to pay duty on the goods coming in. But I think it is a good marriage. I am going to let my colleague talk about the specifics of it in greater detail, but I think this is som ething that obviously has been under discussion for some time. There have been a number of different derivations of the model , and at this point I believe they have settled on one. I cannot speak to the fact of whether the money is guaranteed. Most of us in this House who have been through these deals know that the money is not there until the deal is actually closed. But our sense is that this has a pretty good chance. I think the Corporation itself will benefit from revenue hopefully down the road. As I said, I believe it is still in at least two parts , and that makes sense. You build an initial part, you see what the demand is, and then obviously you have got part of the infrastructure in place and then you can expand it if that is required. So I think all that is very good. So I think my feeling is that this is something that hopefully all Members will support. Obviously the town has had some tough times over the last ten years and I think this is something that will be good because it will reinforce and underscore the maritime portion of St. George’s, which has been historically one of its . . . sense of lifeblood in any case. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 3, Mrs. Lovitta Foggo. You have the floor.
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Bermuda House of Assembly I certainly do rise to support the Junior Mini ster who brought this to the House and I do not think he expects anything less of me, being a St. Georgian from constituency 1. I want to say we definitely approve …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Bermuda House of Assembly I certainly do rise to support the Junior Mini ster who brought this to the House and I do not think he expects anything less of me, being a St. Georgian from constituency 1. I want to say we definitely approve of the M arina and basically we approve of the tariffs being placed aside while we are in the construction phases for the materials that are needed . Madam Deputy Speaker, I guess what I just want to highlight is the fact that yes, all of St. George’s wants this —the Corporation, the Mayor —everybody has been looking for something to happen and we are particularly [anticipating] that once, of course, t his m arina is in place, the impact that it will have from a business point of view. And I have to say this, we know of the direct benefits that it will have to St. George’s proper . But St. David’s —the other part of St. George’s —is definitely looking at thi s as well because of what it will mean, I guess you will say, in the eas tern area with respect to businesses and how they can benefit from the installation of this marina. I just wanted to say that as an east -ender it is important that I at least put my v oice to this with r espect to how it can have a wider benefit for the co mmunity. I think that if the legislation itself is clear, it clearly outlines the fact that this is just for a specified duration. So, in spite of the fact that contracts have not been seen in the wider community, which does create some concern, Madam Deputy Speaker, it still over all is addressing a need for the eastern comm unity, the St. George’s community, in terms of redevelopment in that area so that a better product is pr ovided, in deed, to ensure, if you will, the survival or sustenance of the eastern area. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Opposition Whip. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Ac t 2016? No other Members. I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the Honourable Members for …
Thank you, Opposition Whip. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Ac t 2016? No other Members. I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the Honourable Members for their remarks and their support for this piece of legislation. I just wanted to report to Members . . . they had some questions about what the deal is. First of all, before I get into this I would like to thank the Ho nourable Junior Minister from constituency 1 for point-ing out something that I never knew, that the Town was St. George and the Parish w as St. George’s . . . put that one up there. Adding to more vital pieces of information we have here, the Corporation of St. George has signed a heads of agreement dated October 2015 with one, two, three principals —private sector principals —and the intent ion is to set up two companies, a develop-ment company , 100 per cent owned by the developers, and an operating company , owned 80 per cent by the developers and 20 per cent by the Corporation of St. George’s (or is that St. George?). The Corporation of St. G eorge. So Members were asking how that is going forward. I see we at least have the shape of the agreement of how that is going to be developed and I presume one of the things they are waiting for is this piece of legislation so that they can import the m aterials duty free. So with those remarks, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like the Bill to be committed.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerIt has been moved that the Bill be committed. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. The Chair wil l now call on the Member from constituency 14, Mr. Glen Smith, from Hamilton South. Please take the Chair. House in Committee at 3:46 pm [Mr. Glen …
It has been moved that the Bill be committed. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. The Chair wil l now call on the Member from constituency 14, Mr. Glen Smith, from Hamilton South. Please take the Chair.
House in Committee at 3:46 pm
[Mr. Glen Smith, Chairman]
COMMITTEE ON BILL
CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2016
The ChairmanChairmanGood afternoo n, Honourable Members. We are now in Committee of the whole House for further consideration of the Bill entitled Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act 2016 . I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Chai rman. We have …
Good afternoo n, Honourable Members. We are now in Committee of the whole House for further consideration of the Bill entitled Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act 2016 . I call on the Minister in charge to proceed.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Chai rman. We have three clauses and I would like to move all clauses. The first clause is self -explanatory. The second clause amends the Fifth Schedule to the principal Act to insert a new Customs Pr ocedure Code (CPC) 4224 , which provides end use relief in relation to goods imported by the St. George’s Marina Development Project. The end use conditions of CPC 4224 provide that: (1) qualifying goods must be imported for and incorporated in St. George’s M arina’s structures and facilities; (2) qualifying goods must be imported during the construction phases of the St. George’s Marina Development Project; and (3) the controller of the company carrying out the development must certify that the goods qualify for relief. Clause 3 amends the Sixth Schedule to the principal Act by inserting a new Customs Procedure Code (CPC) 5031, which provides temporary import ation relief in relation to goods imported for the St. George’s Marina Development Project. And the condi2392 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly tions are: (1) qualifying goods must be imported and used only to develop St. George’s Marina structures and facilities; (2) qualifying goods must be imported during the construction phases of the St. George’s Marina Development Project; and (3) the controller of the company carrying out the development must certify that the goods qualify for relief. Those are the three clauses, Mr. Chairman. I invite Honourable Members to participate.
The ChairmanChairmanAll right. Does any other Honourable Member wish to speak to clauses 1 through 3? No. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I would like to move clauses 1 through 3.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that clauses 1 through 3 be approved. Is there any objection to the motion? No. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Clauses 1 through 3 passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Chairman, I move the Preamble.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Preamble be approved. Is there any objection to the motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Gave] [Motion carried: Preamble passed.] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Bill be reported to the House as printed.
The ChairmanChairmanIt has been moved that the Bill be reported t o the House as printed. Is there any objection to this motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Gavel]
The ChairmanChairmanThis Bill will be reported to the House as printed. [Motion carried: The Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act 2016 was considered by a Commi ttee of the whole House and passed without amendment.] House resumed at 3:50 pm [Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, in the Chair] REPORT OF COMMITTEE CUSTOMS …
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Members. It has been moved that the Bill entitled Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act 2016 be approved. Are there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe next item on the Order Paper is Order No. 7, which is the Second Reading of the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016. I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister, you have the floor. BILL SECOND READING BERMUDA HEALTH COUNCIL AMENDMENT ACT 2016 Hon. Jeanne J. …
The next item on the Order Paper is Order No. 7, which is the Second Reading of the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016. I call on the Minister in charge to proceed. Minister, you have the floor.
BILL
SECOND READING
BERMUDA HEALTH COUNCIL AMENDMENT ACT 2016
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Bill entitled the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016 be now read the second time.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerPlease proceed. Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Madam Deputy Speaker, on 24 June 2016 I tabled in the Honourable House the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Ac t 2016, the Bermuda Health Council (Health Services Providers) (Licensing) Regulations 2016, and the Bermuda Health Council (Health Service Providers) (Health Technology) Regulations 2016. Madam …
Please proceed.
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Madam Deputy Speaker, on 24 June 2016 I tabled in the Honourable House the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Ac t 2016, the Bermuda Health Council (Health Services Providers) (Licensing) Regulations 2016, and the Bermuda Health Council (Health Service Providers) (Health Technology) Regulations 2016. Madam Deputy Speaker, today I will present for debate the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016. The Bill prepares for the coming into force of section 13 of the Bermuda Health Council Act 2004 (the Act) which authorises the Bermuda Health Council (the Council) to licen se health service providers. The Bill amends the Act to support this enactment, including provisions to: require all health service pr oviders to have a licence to operate; prohibit financially vested referrals; and regulate the importation of high risk health technology into Bermuda. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bill brings into effect the existing authority for the Council to issue health service providers a licence to operate under section 13 of the Act. Note, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the term “health service providers” refers to health
Bermuda House of Assembly care businesses, not to health care professionals. This is an important distinction. Professionals are a lready regulated by statutory boards and councils. However, once a professional is licensed there is no other requirement for them to open and operate a health care business beyond the standard emplo yment and environmental health requirements. This has led to a proliferation of health care businesses with no controls and limited accountability. The consequence has been a profit led growth in health care businesses rather than based on the population ’s clinical needs. Note, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the two are not always the same and, unfortunately, this has both compromised the quality of some services and increased utilisation of some procedures without medical just ification. Madam Deputy Speaker, a very important feature of this Bill is that it provides for the regulation of self referrals and financially vested referrals. While it is clear that some self referrals are appropriate and improve access for patients, c lose monitoring of util isation and referral patterns have made it evident that unchecked self referrals can lead to unnecessary use of some procedures, which is not good for patients and increases health care costs. This Bill provides for such referrals to be regulated while protecting clin ically appropriate testing that enables patient access to quality service. Accordingly, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bill provides measures for the Council to monitor interest in order to control self referrals and financi ally vested referrals. Permissions can be obtained from the Council for time limited exemptions if the referrals are medically necessary and clinically appropriate. And insurers can be granted permission to require the pr oviders to prove that financially v ested referrals are medically necessary. Madam Deputy Speaker, to support enac tment the Council will establish a register of interest s and publish information related to the exemptions granted. The Council will be required to collaborate with stakeholders to develop and publish a code of practice which will be used to guide procedures for managing financially vested referrals. Madam Deputy Speaker, the existing Bermuda Health Council Act 2004 already provides for the making of regulations to govern the li censing of health service providers. Such regulations have been tabled and will be presented in detail at a later time this month. By way of summary, the proposed Bermuda Health Council (Health Services Providers) (Licensing) Regulations 2016 ( or “Licensi ng Regulations ” here henceforth) , will enable the Council to issue a licence to operate to each health service provider or health care business and to provide for the Council to attach conditions or restrictions to a licence and pr o-cedures for a licence to be denied, cancelled, or suspended. In addition, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bill provides for a new function necessary to contain health care costs, namely, for the Council to monitor the use and importation of health technology. Impor ting high risk healt h technology, specifically high risk medical equipment, will be prohibited unless the per-son obtains a permission and certificate of entry from the Council. The Council will have the authority to attach conditions to the certificate of entry. To enable enforcement of these powers the Bill permits the Council to inspect health service providers and rel evant records after providing notification to providers. And any provider who obstructs an inspector is liable to a fine. Accordingly, the Bill provides authority to the Minister to make regulations for the entry of health technology and the licensing of providers. Such reg ulations have been tabled and will be presented in d etail at a later time this month. By way of summary, Madam Deputy Speaker, the proposed Bermuda Health Council (Health Service Providers) (Health Technology) Regulations 2016 ( or “Health Technology Regulations ” henceforth) , will e nable the Council to review applications for high risk health technology prior to implementation and issue a certificate of entry in the spirit of health system planning and to further protect patient safety. This refers to specific types of medical equipment. Finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bill r equires consequential amendments to the following legislation: • The Public Health Act 1949: Include the def inition for “high risk health technology facility” and authorises the Department of Health to register facilities which operate high risk health technology . • Radiation Act 1972: Provide authority for the Minister to i ssue certificates of entry for radi ation emitting equipment used by health service providers . • Health Insurance (Health Service Providers and Insurers) (Claims) Regulations 2012 : Remove the provision that allows the Council to refuse to register a provider if a penalty is unpaid, all penalties relating to health service providers will now be set out in the licensing regulations . • The Health Insurance (Standard Health Ben efit) Regulations 1971 : Amend language to e nsure alignment with the Bill.
Madam Deputy Sp eaker, this concludes my summary of the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Bill. Before closing, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to remind the Honourable House that section 13 of the Bermuda Health Council Act 2004 has 2394 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly included from inception the authorit y to licen se health service providers. This section had not been brought into effect, but the Council began consulting the stakeholders in 2007 with a formal framework for l icensing health service providers presented in 2010. Extensive consultation took place with stat utory bodies and professional associations at that time, with the hospital assisting in the piloting of the fram ework for high risk health technology. The regulatory framework was further revised based on consultation and, since 2015, additio nal consultation has occurred with all health care professional bodies, professional associations, unregulated professional insurers, go vernment departments, the hospital , and local charities. Consultation included group and individual meetings with all re gulated and unregulated professional groups and insurers , and posting a consultative paper on the Council’s website. Furthermore, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Council also consulted the stakeholders while facilitat-ing a voluntary registration process in Sept ember 2015 in which 246 providers, out of an estimated 334 eligible providers, voluntarily registered with the Council. In January 2016 their names were listed on the Council’s website. The registration process was based upon some of the legislative requir ements noted in the Regulations. Madam Deputy Speaker, I can assure my honourable colleagues that the majority of the provi ders are supportive of the proposed regulatory changes, while a few physicians have opposed based on concerns about the capacity of the Council to make determinations about issuing a licence and clarity of the regulatory guidelines. The Council has listened to their concerns and put in place measures to ensure it has appropriate capacity and technical expertise to evaluate businesses a nd will publish guidelines to clarify requirements and ensure transparency. Indeed, the Council’s current voluntary registration on its website already provides details on how the assessments are done. In addition, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Council has partnered with the Pan American Health Organisation (PAHO) and the Ministry to engage i nternational subject matter experts as required, d evelop procedures , which incorporate specialised medical expertise and embody decision making in the committee format in which members are local submatter experts . Madam Deputy Speaker, I will have an amendment to make at the time, and I have given a copy to the Shadow and there are copies for the House. Madam Deputy Speaker, this concludes my brief and I hereby introduce the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016 to this Honourable House on behalf of the Ministry of Health and Seniors. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Minister. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 16, the Shadow Minister of Health, Comm unity and Sports, Mr. M. A. Weeks. You have the floor.
Mr. Michael A. WeeksThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I have listened to the Minister , and I was hoping that she would have held it for at least for a week or two. So I think in the Health Council’s effort to regulate physicians and other health care providers the …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I have listened to the Minister , and I was hoping that she would have held it for at least for a week or two. So I think in the Health Council’s effort to regulate physicians and other health care providers the essence of this amendment would really destroy the private sector business, Madam Deputy Speaker. Therefore, we on this side are not going to support these proposed amendments. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill entitled Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 6, the Honourable W. L. Furbert. You have the floor. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy …
Thank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill entitled Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 6, the Honourable W. L. Furbert. You have the floor.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Minister clearly has not laid out a reason why the Council is doing what it is trying to do. I am not sure about other Members in this House, but to me i t just seems like another way to get at certain physicians that they were not able to get to in other ways. And I would have thought that the Minister would have laid out a clear plan. And I heard that she has had consultations with groups , and I am wondering whether the individuals , the groups that the Minister talks about , have seen the final draft of the legislation and whether they [have seen] the fine tuning that it has gone through to see the impact that it is going to have on businesses. Why is the Minister pushing this right now? I do not know. I do not know . . . and it probably has to do with costs . And I see the Minister shaking her head . But the major cost in our health care is the hospital. But KEMH is not even included in this particular document. Does the Minister want to—
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Point of order.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAnd your point of order i s? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: The Honourable Member is misleading the House; KEMH is included in this le gislation.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much, Minister. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 6. Hon. W ayne L. Furbert: I do not . . . maybe the Mi nister can point it out when we get to the section, but I do not clearly see where the KEMH — [Inaudible interjection] …
Thank you very much, Minister. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 6. Hon. W ayne L. Furbert: I do not . . . maybe the Mi nister can point it out when we get to the section, but I do not clearly see where the KEMH — [Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Well, that is my point. It was not mentioned in the brief , and it was not . . . I do not clearly see it in any of the Act itself. Maybe this is some new thing that has come out that someone just made up, but clearly I do not see anywhere where KEMH is talked about. It talks about physicians, it talks about doctors’ offices , but it does not talk about KEMH at all. And so maybe the Minister can clearly point out to us where that is. The main thing also is about choice. The greatest opportunity . . . there is no doubt when you go to the hospital , the cost for a CAT scan, the cost for an X -ray, the cost for an MRI is more expensive than our from local physicians. It is m ore expensive. Are you going to correct me again on that one? I see the Minister wants to rise.
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker .
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe Chair recognises the Mi nister. You have the floor. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: And I would just like to—
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerYou are . . . it is a — Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: The Member is misleading the House. I am not able to indicate the hospital because it is in the Regulations . In the fee it says “General Acute Care Hospital.” It is right in there in terms …
You are . . . it is a — Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: The Member is misleading the House. I am not able to indicate the hospital because it is in the Regulations . In the fee it says “General Acute Care Hospital.” It is right in there in terms of the application fee. I did not mention it in my brief because the Regulations come up in another week’s time.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 6. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I thought it was point of order to the cost at the hospital . . . that is why I thought the Honourable Member was risi ng. And there is no doubt that the cost …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 6.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I thought it was point of order to the cost at the hospital . . . that is why I thought the Honourable Member was risi ng. And there is no doubt that the cost at KEMH is much higher than a physician’s office. So why would we as a country want the physicians to do more than KEMH? I do not u nderstand that because it drives the cost up much, much higher. I mean I had the opp ortunity last week, I had an accident . I fell and struck my side and ended up at . . . thanks to the MP Foggo from St. David’s who fought very hard to keep the Lamb Foggo open, I ended up down there and had an X -ray. I had excellent service by the doctor down there. Can you imagine, Madam Deputy Speaker, if it was not down there where my chance of getting to KEMH may have been very slim? And so I had to point my finger at somebody for . . . or my family would have to point their finger at somebody . . . an d have the time to get to KEMH at the time. But the point is that this particular legislation, to me, does not do justice for what we feel it should do on this side. . And my honourable colleague, the Ho nourable Michael Weeks, has asked the Minister to at least pull it so that we can have some further consultation. And maybe we need to clarify those points that we have not even talked about. I do not know why there is a rush. We talk about cooperation. We talk about working together much more. I heard the C hairman of their party, after the Honourable Member Shawn Crockwel l left, say we are going to have more transparency ; we are going to have more openness going forward. And here we are just a week later and we are back at the same stage as we were, like som ebody has forgotten that som ebody made a statement. Well, maybe they are locked in a world that my honourable friend and I came from a long time ago, that they do it my way or no way. All I am saying is that we should take time out to talk about it further. My honourable colleague and maybe some other people who are much more learned than me on this subject, to see whether it really works out the way it is. The Honourable Member talk ed about the physicians . And you know there are normally two . . . I think there are two bodies of physicians , and they never agree.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Like lawyers, but not quite like lawyers . . . I am talking about the two physicians out there. And I will ask the Minister whether both phys icians . . . and I forget what they are called, but both groups have agreed to this piece of legislation going forward. But haste makes waste. And I think that we should be able to take time out and work it out for the betterment of Bermuda overall. Thank you. 2396 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly The Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 34, the Honourable K. N. Wilson. You have the floor.
Ms. Kim N. WilsonThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. First and foremost, Madam Deputy Speaker, I am sure I am joined by the other 35 Members in this Honourable House in recognis ing that the rising cost of health care in this jurisdiction is unsustainable and that drastic times call for drastic measures. And …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. First and foremost, Madam Deputy Speaker, I am sure I am joined by the other 35 Members in this Honourable House in recognis ing that the rising cost of health care in this jurisdiction is unsustainable and that drastic times call for drastic measures. And w e certainly need to take steps to rein it in, so to speak , because we cannot continue down this road. However, and let me say my second point is that I do also recognise that the Bermuda Health Council has , as part of their mandate, to look at issues conc erning health care and the like. I mean no disr espect to any of the members of the Bermuda Health Council, but earlier you heard a little bit of a jab between some of my colleagues here about doctors and lawyers. I can say, hand on heart, that the legal pr ofession would be up in arms if there was a Council, not made up of lawyers, that was going to turn around and try to regulate us and licens e us—absolutely up in arms . Which begs the question, from the physicians that I know and that I have spoken to concerning this, there is a larger percentage of them that do not su pport this. I find it ironic that we would have a Bermuda Health Council which is not made up of physicians turning around and saying to the physicians that practice in this Island, By the way you must meet X, Y, Z criteria or we will not permit you to have a licence . Again, I have to compare it to the profession that I know, which is lawyers . We certainly would not be tolerating this. So we have a situation that is being proposed where physici ans already have to register with the Bermuda Medical Council, first and foremost, that must be their governing body. And then once they are registered then they also have to go and apply for a licence under the Bermuda Health Council. So I wonder what hap pens in circumstances where the Bermuda Medical Council, [who are] physicians, provides a particular doctor with their . . . we call it a practicing certificate, whatever certificate a doctor has to have to be a member of the Medical Council, and then they turn around and apply for a licence from the Health Council and the Health Council rejects them. Who trumps who? Again, I am going to compare it to lawyers because this would not be the case, all right?
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Your point of order is? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. We need to clarify one is a professional and the other is a licence. It is a busines s . . . there is a . . . …
Thank you. Your point of order is?
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. We need to clarify one is a professional and the other is a licence. It is a busines s . . . there is a . . . Point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker . There is a body which is the business and the other is a professional.
[Inaudible interjection]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe Chair recognises the Member from constituency 34.
Ms. Kim N. WilsonYes, thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And again, with the case with respect to la wyers, we do have a professional body that also pr ovides us with our licenc es. We would not make an application to the Bermuda Bar Association to receive a licence and our pr acticing …
Yes, thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And again, with the case with respect to la wyers, we do have a professional body that also pr ovides us with our licenc es. We would not make an application to the Bermuda Bar Association to receive a licence and our pr acticing certificate and then turn around and make an application to a non- legal body and ask them for a licence. And I suspect the same is true with the CPA, the Certified Public Accountants, here in Bermuda as well. So, in any event, Madam Deputy Speaker, as I was saying, the issue, as I see it, which is all the more reason why we are not supporting this legisl ation, has something to do with the issue I just spoke about concerning the duplicity of processing and what if, for example, where the Bermuda Medical Council as the professional body, as the Honourable Minister just spoke about, provides permission for a person to practice, yet we have the Bermuda Health Council, which is not made up of doctors and physicians sa ying No, we’re not going to give you a licence. Again, who trumps who? So the other issue I have, Madam Deputy Speaker, is with respect to the issue concerning f inancially vested referrals and self referrals. Now, I recognise that there are individuals out there who we know actually will utilise self referrals in far too many cases where they probably are not necessary. My daughter is 14 and she watches . . . what is that medical show? [Inaudible interjection]
Ms. Kim N. WilsonNo, the one that everybody watches. [Inaudible interjectio n]
Ms. Kim N. WilsonI cannot remember, but it is a medical show that comes on and she watches all that, so she tries to self diagnose herself . And if I listen to Bermuda House of Assembly her she would be having self referrals every other day for every ailment. So we recognise …
I cannot remember, but it is a medical show that comes on and she watches all that, so she tries to self diagnose herself . And if I listen to
Bermuda House of Assembly her she would be having self referrals every other day for every ailment. So we recognise t hat there is a potential for abuse. But what concerns me is that we have a legi slation that is attempting to regulate an area concer ning the use of MRIs and other types of ( how did the Minister speak about it?) high risk technology. So we are attempting to regulate the administration of that in circumstances where we do not even have any data, any hard evidence to confirm that there is over - utilisation in Bermuda, except for (which I will come to in a moment before the point of order raises ) there is evidence to suggest that when we compare Bermuda to the OECD then we do have a higher percentage of high risk technology and imaging per person than the other OECD countries. Well, with respect, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I am not suggesting that there are other countries that Bermuda is , you know, more sophisticated, et cetera. But you cannot compare Bermuda to the OECD. We are more aligned with the countries that are close to us to our north, which is America; northwest, which is Canada; as well as England. So B ermuda as a juri sdiction in its level of sophistication is more aligned with those countries. We have Bermudians who may have an ai lment and they are accustomed to going and standing . . . I do not know why I am getting a point of order.
Hon. Jeanne J. A therden: Point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAnd your point of order is? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: The Honourable Member is inadvertently misleading the House. The standard is not an overseas standard. The standard is the Bermuda standard. It is the Bermuda average.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAh . . . just . . . the Chair re cognises the Member from constituency 34.
Ms. Kim N. WilsonThank you. The Bermuda standard insofar as the imaging per person is measured against the OECD. Bermudians are not . . . Bermuda is not part of the OECD. We are a sophisticated jurisdiction. When people get ill and they need to be referred, we are going off to Bo …
Thank you. The Bermuda standard insofar as the imaging per person is measured against the OECD. Bermudians are not . . . Bermuda is not part of the OECD. We are a sophisticated jurisdiction. When people get ill and they need to be referred, we are going off to Bo ston and Baltimore and New York and Miami and England and Canada, and these other types of jurisdi ctions. And because of our level of sophistication we are going to be hard pressed trying to tell patients that they are unable to receive any type of high risk tec hnology and the like when the doctor prescribes that because we want to compare ourselves to OECD countries. And that is not acceptable because Bermuda is not one of those; we are not even closely aligned to them. The other issue that I hav e quite quickly, Madam Deputy Speaker, is with respect to, again, this Bermuda Health Council not being made up of phys icians (and again I mean no disrespect to the Council because I know that they work very, very diligently and hard with respect to their mandate) . But the other issue I have, which is perhaps of greater concern to me, is the fact that this Council will have the ability to issue guidelines to physicians, and therefore patients, and they will be able to issue these guidelines and enforce thes e guidelines in the absence, Madam Deputy Speaker, of consultation with the physician. What do I mean by that? One of the best moments that I have had as a Member of Parliament was last May when ( and I will toot my own horn) I and other Members and colleagues were able, through a number of actions throughout this community, to reverse the Minister’s decision for mammograms. That was last year, May, and it was a wonderful day for women, men, and the people that love women. And the reality is as a result of that (that did not come out right, did it?) But it was a wonderful day, Madam Deputy Speaker, because we had guidelines that were being issued by the Bermuda Health Council based on the U .S. Preventive [Service] Taskforce that was saying , Mammograms aren’ t necessary for women, you don’t have to take them until you’re 50 unless you have a pre- existing condition, et cetera, et cetera. But you remember the bras that were on Front Street. Women were in an uproar , because I guara ntee (and I am going to digress for a moment ) if this guideline said that men cannot have prostrate exams , it would not even have been considered. But the fact is that it was affecting women’s health and that was one reason why it was considered, I say, because I suspect that the people that were sitting under the U.S. Preventative [Service] Taskforce were mostly men and insurance companies . But I am digressing. The point I am trying to make, Madam Deputy Speaker, is the fact that this Council can now issue guidelines to doctors and phys icians , which may very well be against best practice or standard practice, and they have the ability to enforce those guidelines. And we saw last May where they were trying to issue guidelines concerning mammograms and they had to do a rethink. And I thank the Minister sincerely for actually doing that and pulling that. I thank her and I ap-preciate that she, obviously, listened to the population. But the point I am making, Madam Deputy Speaker, is that this is a Council which has no phys i2398 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly cians on it that c an just sit around a look at some r esearch, do some Google research, or whatever other research that they do . . . and I am not trying to belittle at all the work of the Council, at all . But the point I am making is that they have the power to issue guidel ines to physicians and, in turn , the physician’s patients, without having to have consultation with those same physicians. And that cannot be right. You cannot possibly have this Board that has all this power to grant a licence to a physician, to issue gui delines to phys icians , without even having to consult the physicians , and this Board does not have physicians on it. Again, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will end where I started. This would not happen in the legal community and I certainly suspect the same goes for the account ing community as well. And the doctors that I have spoken [to] since this has arisen—this has gone on for almost at least a couple of years since I have been in this House— have all confirmed that this is not something that they support. And there are a myriad of reasons why not, but the main reason r elates specifically with their inability to perform the task of patient care unfettered. We heard just recently Mrs. Wedderburn who is the . . . is it Executive Director?
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThe CEO .
Ms. Kim N. WilsonThe CEO, excuse me, of the Bermuda Health Council say , We acknowledge that the vast majority of physicians are compliant . They are not tearing the system, they are not trying to beat the system, they are not trying to abuse the system . So if we acknowledge that …
The CEO, excuse me, of the Bermuda Health Council say , We acknowledge that the vast majority of physicians are compliant . They are not tearing the system, they are not trying to beat the system, they are not trying to abuse the system . So if we acknowledge that and that is our starting point, then why are we entering into legislation that is so punitive to all physicians when you already start from a point of view that there are all fine and they are not breaching any type of code, the medical ethics, et cetera? But we are entering into this punitive legisl ation. And when I look at the fines and they are . . . the increase in fines and penalties from $5,000 to $20,000 . . . again penalties like that are not even that high for criminal offences. So I will end by where I started. We do not support this piece of legislation. There are a number of reasons why . I have just highlighted just a few and I am sure that my colleagues will join in on that. Ho wever, again, I can assure you that the Learned Members that are sitting around this Chamber can agree with me that we would never be passing legislation like this for lawyers where they do not have a body that is governed by . . . that is giving direction to la wyers without consultation to law yers and there are not even lawyers sitting on the body —totally unacceptable. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 31, Southampton West Central, Mr. S. G. Crockwell. You have the floor.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I concur with my Honourable and Learned Member who just took her seat. In some respects when you look at the Bill , as the old saying goes, it has taken a sledgehammer, Madam Deputy Speaker, to crack a nut , because with the comments …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I concur with my Honourable and Learned Member who just took her seat. In some respects when you look at the Bill , as the old saying goes, it has taken a sledgehammer, Madam Deputy Speaker, to crack a nut , because with the comments of the CEO where there seems to be widespread —
[Gavel]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMembers, Members . . . Members, Members, would a ll Members look at the Speaker please. I would like quiet so that I can hear properly the individual that is speaking.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As I was saying, the CEO has already stated that there seems to be general com pliance in relation to the utilisation of these high risk health technologies . Then one has to ask , really , why are we debating a very onerous piece …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As I was saying, the CEO has already stated that there seems to be general com pliance in relation to the utilisation of these high risk health technologies . Then one has to ask , really , why are we debating a very onerous piece of legislation today? But let me start off by saying, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I wish not to be redundant so I am not going to repeat some of the concerns already raised, but health care is very critical to any community and any society. It is one of the most critical areas . And I think that this Parliament is going to have to grapple with a plethora of healt h care issues going forward. I do know that the Honourable Minister is working extraordinarily hard to wrap her mind around and tackle many of these issues. These issues have a major impact on all of us, Madam Deputy Speaker, even those who are healthy and never have to go and see a doctor . They are impacted by the cost of health care and certainly impacted by the quality of health care in our society. And it is paramount that the health care industry is properly regulated to ensure that the users of the health care system are protected. So I have no issue with the Minister and the Government seeking to achieve that regulation. But health care has also become a business. It is an extremely competitive business worldwide. We have private hospitals, we have private clinics, we have doctors with their own offices and the like. And what we need to do is strike the right balance between people and profits because that is what it comes down to. We do not want those who are providing health care to be driven by pr ofits and, therefore, diminishing the quality of health care to the patient. But we also do
Bermuda House of Assembly not want to restrict and hamper competition because individuals have a right to choose which type of health care they want to have, who they want to go to, to acquire that health care. I say this about the legal profession ( and I certainly concur with my friend), we are very particular in the legal profession as to who regulates us and who oversees us. You have to understand us in order to be able to properly regulat e us. So I take that point . And I will get to that in a minute in terms of the individuals who will be charged, particularly the inspectors who will be appointed to actually superintend over this. But the relationship between a patient and his or her doctor is very important. It is critical. People should have a right to choose who they will receive their medical treatment from. It comes down som etimes, Madam Deputy Speaker, to a matter of trust. You know someone or someone may have treated your relative an d they recommended this individual and you go there and you develop a certain degree of trust and, therefore, you want to get your medical treatment from that particular individual or from that particular facility. So, again, it is important that the compe tition and the ability of these private sector health care providers are able to operate without too many fetters. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, one of the main issues that I had, and I do not wish to have a committee discussion at this stage, but when you look at the definition of “high risk health technology” (and, Madam Deputy Speaker, that is found on page 2 of the Bill, and the Minister may wish to address this when we get into Committee) , I found that it was extraordinarily broad. It says “‘high risk health techno logy’ means any medical device or medical equipment used for the purposes of diagnosis and treatment of disease or rehabilitation which satisfies any of the following criteria.” So we start off with “any medical device” and now we are going to “w hich satisfies any of the follo wing criteria.” The criteria are: “(a) penetrates the skin, tissue and bone; (b) makes contact with the skin, ti ssue and bone of significant duration; (c) affects the vital organs including the heart, brain, and lungs; (d) creates systemic effects throughout the body rather than locali zed effects to a targeted site” and then another “and” —“and includes a CT scanner, MRI m achine, X -ray machine, radiation emitting equipment,” et cetera, et cetera. So when you read this entire definition, bas ically it is everything. It is everything in the doctor’s office , really , that is captured under this definition. That is way too broad. It is too broad when you get into looking at the powers of the inspectors because the inspectors can now go into an office in relation to any of this equipment and ha ve the power to go in, inspect, and in some cases to even seize records and the like. So, you know, I would understand if there was a specific concern about specific high risk health technology an d the Health Council has zeroed in on a mischief, zeroed in on a significant concern, zeroed in on an area of abuse and said, Okay, we are co ncerned about this, let us now do something about the overuse of these machines or equipment. But to have almost every single piece of equipment that a doctor will be using in relation to his or her patient is just too broad. It is too broad. And so when you have that broadness and then you then give inspectors the power that they will have, then I think you do not ha ve the balance. I do support regulation, particularly in this area, but it has got to be balanced because you have two competing forces. You have the need to regulate and to protect , and the like, and then you have the need to allow or create an env ironment where competition can provide better options to the consumer. The other concern I have, Madam Deputy Speaker, is the manner in which these inspectors are actually appointed. There are no criteria that the ind ividuals who are appointed have any specialis ed expertise in this area. There is nothing in the legislation, nothing coming from the Minister, to state whether or not there is going to be a training programme in place. I mean this is going to point . . . I mean, I am sure prudence will dictate at the end of the day . But we here in this House have to see it in the legislation. You can have a situation where . . . and I can tell you, Madam Deputy Speaker, you know, I deal with a variety of issues and there are various gover nment boards, various governm ent organisations, who are appointed, and I have been in front of judges and the judges actually expect that the individuals who are appointed to these boards to oversee certain areas are specialists , that they are specialists. I have had judges say , Well, I have to take the advice or the decision of this body because surely they are on this board because they are specialists in these areas. And I can tell you most of the time they are not. They are people who do not have a clue. They are people who are fr iends of somebody who got appointed to a board so they can have either a title or they can have something to do. Many of them do good work . But I can tell you it is not always the case that individuals who are appointed to certain boards to oversee certain areas have expertise in that area. Now, when you are talking about inspectors who are going to be inspecting very expensive, in some cases, very expensive equipment and have the power to commandeer that equipment, and to destroy that equipment, those peo ple better know what they are doing. They had better understand the equipment that they are inspecting in order for this to be a process of integrity. So if I have these issues in terms of whether or not this Bill is striking the right balance, then I hav e a problem with the Bill. And I can say that I am sure other Members in this House have been lobbied, I 2400 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly have been lobbied by multiple doctors who have concerns, who have said that there has not been a real robust consultation. And one thing about the word “consultation”, it is an interesting word . You know, consultation can mean many things to different people. I know one person, his definition of consultation is, I told you —that is consultation, okay? And then there will be other individuals where consul tation is , Let’s have some dialogue, let’s have some feedback, tell me what you think about it, we will take it under consideration and then we will proceed, okay? I am not quite sure which definition was used in this case, but I have been told that there was not r obust consultation and that there are quite a few doctors who have some disquiet as it relates to this Bill as drafted, not as it relates to drafting something, not as it relates to achieving something in this area, but the Bill as drafted is not striking the right balance. Madam Deputy Speaker, I think that this Bill is creating more bureaucracy. I think it is creating greater administrative burden and costs on health care providers, which will take them away from their primary objective, which i s providing care to their patients. So I believe that more needs to be done on this. I believe that there is not, coming from me at least, Madam Deputy Speaker, a reluctance to try and achieve the objective that the Minister and the Government wish to ac hieve. What I am saying is that I do not think this Bill achieves it , and I invite the Minister to let us try and tweak it or mayb e even entertain some of the concerns that are being articulated to Members outside of the Government as it relates to this so that we can get it right. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill entitled Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair calls on the Member from c onstit uency 3, Ms. Lovitta Foggo, the Opposition Whip.
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am duty bound to stand to my feet. Madam Deputy Speaker, this reminds me of a couple of years ago when another Minister under the OBA, acting in the Ministry of Health, tried to introduce legislation that was met with outcry , both from …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am duty bound to stand to my feet. Madam Deputy Speaker, this reminds me of a couple of years ago when another Minister under the OBA, acting in the Ministry of Health, tried to introduce legislation that was met with outcry , both from those of us who are legislators as well as the wider community. And as the Member who just took his seat pointed out, especially from a bureaucratic point of view it is introducing within the amendments a layer that I guess is almost an affront . . . that is an affront to health providers as well as those who would be the patients. I certainly would not want to see myself in a position, Madam Deputy Speaker, where I have a doctor that I wish to go to , and because of the fees and other things that the current Minister is trying to put in place has his hands tied, if you will, or cannot use at times very necessary tools in terms of determining my health status. Madam Deputy Speaker, when reading through this legislation, the ideas that come to mind, the question that comes to mind is , What is the real purpose of this? Because on the face of it , it seems to go after a certain area in terms of machinery that, I guess, falls under digital imaging and the like. It seems to go after a certain area. And because there are so few health providers in Bermuda that have a whole scope of machinery like that, it would likewise seem to be targeting certain health care providers. And so, Madam Deputy Speaker — Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerYes, your point of order is? POINT OF ORDER [Imputing improper motive] Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: The Honourable Member is imputing improper motives to the legislation.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 3.
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Yes, it would seem that it is going after certain physicians. In fact, Madam Deputy Speaker, those of us who, looking at this legislation, I know that I did, I have heard my Member , the Honourable Kim Wilson, speak to the fact that she …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Yes, it would seem that it is going after certain physicians. In fact, Madam Deputy Speaker, those of us who, looking at this legislation, I know that I did, I have heard my Member , the Honourable Kim Wilson, speak to the fact that she was in consultation with health care providers . I know I certainly asked some doctors. My daughter is a doctor. I certainly reached out to her as well across the waters. And I was not met with one physician who is in agreement with what has been put together in this amendment . I have not met with one. And it still has the effect of impacting on doctor/clien t relationships. It will have that impact. And I do not want anybody telling me . . . we live in a d emocratic society, a society that is considered quite affluent . And being a member of this society we enjoy certain, I guess you can say abilities that people of other countries may not have to their avail. And if I am struck down with some sort of illness, or at least think I am, I want to know that I have the ability to go to my health care provider who can provide me a battery of tests and not in any way h ave that infringed or be i mpeded from performing the tests that could very well ensure that , if I am ill or need medical attention, the issue is discovered early through whatever tools are
Bermuda House of Assembly needed and that the matter can be arrested, remedied, or whatever. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would have thought that there are several instances and, we will call it the bra incident, the other incident where, again, there was talk about putting a midlevel council in place that would have determined whether or not certain tests could be implemented by doctors. To me, I see that coming back to the fore. I was against it then , and I am against it now. And as a team we are against it because it seems to be using a broad paintbrush in order to get at some health care providers who are believed to not necessarily be using their . . . I will just put it under the broad umbrella of “expertise” for the reasons that they ought to be using it. And in a situation like that, if you are trying to ensure that there are no abuses taking pl ace, then put something together that deals with the abusers that will allow you to find them. Not to be introducing a di fferent tier [of persons] who do not even have the medical expertise to be able to put regulations and the like together. Yes, they can rely on doctors . But again, as honourable colleagues have pointed out ––and I can say that in Education when I was invited by the then Minister of Education to come in and give input on the Education Councils and when I learned that the Councils were going to be made up of really, mostly, non-educators, I absolutely outright objected. And I used the same arguments as my honourable col-league who sits to my left. She pointed out the fact that in the legal profession, I am sure they would outright object to a council being put in place who do not have the legal expertise.
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerYour point of order is? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: The Honourable Member, and I should have said it earlier, is still misleading the House. There are three doctors that sit on the Health Council.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 3.
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoThank you, Madam Deput y Speaker. In spite of the fact that there are three doctors who sit on there, the overwhelming majority of doctors, as I understand, are not in favour of this. And I think we are speaking broadly to the entire medical community. And without the overwhelm …
Thank you, Madam Deput y Speaker. In spite of the fact that there are three doctors who sit on there, the overwhelming majority of doctors, as I understand, are not in favour of this. And I think we are speaking broadly to the entire medical community. And without the overwhelm ing support of that community I think that the Minister should feel hard pressed to bring this type of legislation forward and at least should have heavily relied on input from them. Because given what she is trying to do, perhaps they could have helped her structure something that would have met with that community’s approval and, perhaps in so doing, be able to accomplish which she is trying, I guess trying to accomplish, with this legisl ation. And so, Madam Deputy Speaker, again, with the feedback that has come from the medical comm unity, with clearly the fact that it seems to be looking to try and regulate things in a manner that is to just deter people —deter, I guess professionals —from doing certain things and to take control from them and put it in the hands of others to ensure that they do not do it, to me that is a backward way of doing things because legislation should be put in place that is going to bene-fit everyone on a whole, particularly the people in one’s country. I am sure that we will hear that same level of outcry when patients begin to realise that this legisl ation will have the effect of stopping their doctor from implementing certain processes and procedures with respect to one’s health to try and get a correct reading on the medical st ate of the particular patient.
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerYour point of order is? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. These regulati ons will not stop patients being able to receive care from their physicians.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 3.
Ms. Lovitta F. FoggoThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. What I am saying is that m aybe that is not what it is attempting to do, but that may be the outcome . Because if a patient is being denied certain availability to certain medical devices, then it may have the effect of not …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. What I am saying is that m aybe that is not what it is attempting to do, but that may be the outcome . Because if a patient is being denied certain availability to certain medical devices, then it may have the effect of not allowing a physician to determine the medical state of that patient in order to be able to prescribe or give the correct prescription for trying to alleviate the medical condition. So, when we are talking about implementing something that has the potential of doing something like that, particularly as you are speaking about one’s health, I would think that that is cause to pause and to rethink how you may wish to approach this. Because 2402 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly anything that may have a detrimental impact, when it comes to people’s health, is reason enough to pause. The Honourable Minister can tell you that I did approach her myself and ask her if she would consider not bringing the legislation because we have concerns with the language of this legislation, with the impending impacts that it will potentially have. And we believe that that ma y not necessarily be— and she is hearing some of these arguments now —what she is intending to create. But we believe that those are the types of things that will come to fruition. And because of that , it is of paramount importance that we pause. I am hoping that the Minister will rise and r eport progress and give herself the opportunity to look at a better way of dealing with this and, perhaps, come with different amendments that may have the accord of the entire House. So, on that, Madam Deputy Speaker, I take my seat.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 23, the Minister of Home Affairs, the Hon-ourable J. P. Gordon- Pamplin. You have the floor. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: …
Thank you very much. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 23, the Minister of Home Affairs, the Hon-ourable J. P. Gordon- Pamplin. You have the floor.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, there are a couple of things that have been said this afternoon that I believe are worthy of comment, things that have come from Honourable Members opposite. Firstly, when I heard the Honourable Member ask why are we having such haste, w ell I would say, Madam Deputy Speaker, that when we won the Go vernment and the right to serve the people of Bermuda in December of 2012, there was already in train som ething with respect to containing the costs of health care. That was there. It was something that was a concern and it was something that has been looked at, and over the past three years certainly has conti nued to have a lev el of engagement and interaction. I do know that the Council had been having various meetings with the medical profession. And those meetings have had interaction, input, consultation with, concerns expressed by, and resolution relating to the legislation that we now see in front of us. So you know, we are looking at ways by which the costs of health care can be curtailed. And Members are saying, you know, KEMH is not i ncluded. Well, you cannot put every single thing in every single piece of legislation. W hen things are co vered by regulations which are being done under a separate heading, then you will not see it necessarily in the principal Bill or the amendments to the Bill. But when I hear Members talking about this Medical Council is, you know, somethi ng that would basically never be allowed in any other profession and we would not permit this to happen, let me just point something out. The Health Council Act came onto the legislation in this country in 2004!
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWe are aware of that. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Not yesterday, not something that the present Minister for Health has brought into being, it was brought onto the books in 2004. And if I may, Madam Deputy Speaker, if the Honourable Member will stop waving papers and being rude …
We are aware of that.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Not yesterday, not something that the present Minister for Health has brought into being, it was brought onto the books in 2004. And if I may, Madam Deputy Speaker, if the Honourable Member will stop waving papers and being rude and disrespectful, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would be happy, if I may, if you will permit me, to allow me to have a look at the Health Council and its func-tions. The function of the Council, as the Member opposite from [constituency] 34 was up in arms, This would never happen in the legal . . . well, “The functions of the Council are —(a) to ensure the provision of essential health services and to promote and maintain good health for the residents of Bermuda” . Function one. Carrying on, I will not read all of it because of the interest of time, but it says, “(g) to licence health [service providers]”. So that is their function under which they were established. So to hear Members opposite now having tremendous up- in-arms problems about the fact that they a re licensing health care providers —how dare they?—that is what their function is. I am not saying that we cannot achieve the objectives in different ways, but that is the purpose for which they were embodied and that is what they are attempting to do. So to hear these types of criticisms obviously says to me that somebody has not read the legislation and tied it back to the principal Act. Because if you can criticise what it is that is being done and what is being done is in conformity with what the principal Act says needs to be done, then I am just a little bit confused. And then it goes on to speak about the composition of the Council, Madam Deputy Speaker. The composition of the Council, it shall consist of: the Chief Medical Officer (as an ex officio me mber); the Chief Executive Officer (as an ex officio member); the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Health and Family Services; the Financial Secretary; “and not less than nine nor more than eleven of other ‘ordinary members ’ appointed by the Minister .” So if this is the makeup and the conditions under which the Council was formed and the me mbership of that Council, those ordinary members, I am sure that the Honourable Minister is not looking for people who are living under a rock somewhere and coming and saying, Now I want to choose you to be on this committee.
Bermuda House of Assembly It follows, to me, in at least having appointed members to the Health Council shortly after we took over the Government, and I can say that I served in the position that the Honourable Minister has now, as Minister of Health, you have to look for people, not just who are, as this says , “ordinary members,” but ordinary members who are sufficiently engaged. So I will not sit and allow people to say they are just people who are not doctors. Well, s ometimes you look at the medical profession and doctors may not necessarily be the ones to be able to police their own profession. I am not saying that they cannot, I am saying not necessarily, because when one has an interest in certain areas, sometimes —and I know this from personal experience—there are times when you cannot see the forest for the trees. So sometimes maybe you do need an outside eye to have a look at what it is that you are trying to do. So I do not want to hear people complaining about the makeup of the Council that has been in ex-istence since 2004 under previous administrations , when we heard absolutely nothing about the makeup of that Council. So to hear it today, I think it is nothing more than disingenuous. That is my observation. But let me just say —
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMember, if you would have a seat? Thank you. The point of order? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Michael J. Scott: Not one Member, and I have listened carefully to everybody, has raised the const itution of —mislead ing the House—has raised the constitution of the Council as the concern …
Member, if you would have a seat? Thank you. The point of order?
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Hon. Michael J. Scott: Not one Member, and I have listened carefully to everybody, has raised the const itution of —mislead ing the House—has raised the constitution of the Council as the concern with this piece of this legislation and its amendment. Not one. The Honourable Minister is misleading us.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Madam Deputy Speaker, I think the Honourable Member who just spoke clearly did not listen earlier. As he is making that point of order his Honourable Member is slinking in her seat, embarrassed at the fact that …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Madam Deputy Speaker, I think the Honourable Member who just spoke clearly did not listen earlier. As he is making that point of order his Honourable Member is slinking in her seat, embarrassed at the fact that he is making this observation, and I say that because the Honourable Member from [constituency] 34 very clearly stood on the floor and said, These people are made up of people who are not doctors and how dare they come and tell doctors how to operate. That was a critic ism of the makeup of the Council. So, obviously, I take the point. Maybe you did not hear, maybe you were so focused on your presen-tation that you intend to make that you may not have heard. So I will be a little bit kind in that regard. But do not sit and say I am misleading the House because that is not the case. The Honourable Member made that comment and it is under that circumstance that I wish to continue. So we are not talking about just a bunch of neophytes coming in with zero interest or knowledge about health care. There are times when we are tasked to do things of which we know nothing , or of which we have very little knowledge. And what do we do as intelligent people? Because I can guarantee that as people are appointed as Ministers in various categories, we do not know everything about the pr ofessions that come under the areas that are under our jurisdiction. But we find out and we find out by bothering to speak to those who do know . And that is what an intelligent person does when they are tas ked with a function, you figure out, Okay I don’t have the expertise here. You know , I can say that I grew up in a medical home, but I am not a doctor . So I cannot assume that by osmosis I can somehow be able to speak intelligently about the medical profes sion. But I can certainly intelligently engage with people who are in the medical profession to be able to get a feel of what might be appropriate. I say that only to say that if that is my a pproach and attitude, if that is the approach and att itude of Mi nisters who have found themselves in areas with which they are not necessarily experts, then that would be, in my estimation, and certainly my exper ience, the manner in which members of the Health Council take their responsibilities and they take those to people who are experts in that area. None of them professes to be, but neither are they required to be, based on the legislation that Members opposite were happy to bring and pilot through this Honourable House. So let us not be di singenuous with things l ike that, Madam Deputy Speaker. Now let me just say that when we are looking at what happens in foreign jurisdictions, it was said that, We are not part of the OECD, do not compare us. And I can understand segregating us from that environment . But let me say that in certain foreign j urisdictions, and especially the one to which we look for the majority of our guidelines and procedures that we follow, which is the United States, they do not permit a lot of the things that we do permit. So when we are talki ng about restricting high risk technology, let me say that there are, I believe something like three MRI machines on the Island, as an example, because that is one of the things that is included in the definition of high risk machinery. Are you trying to s ay that it is okay and appropriate for us to now say bring in six or seven or eight or ten more? How does your population sustain that plethora of equipment in the population size that we have? And what will ultimately happen is that it may end up being a situation where people who have i nvested heavily in that level of technology are going to want to have a return on their investment because it is 2404 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly a business and sometimes business, even in priority to health care and concerns . . . but if we have that many more and people can say , Well, I’ve got to pay for it , then would we rather not keep it honed to a smaller number of high risk machinery that is easily controllable, not permit all and sundry to bring new machinery across the borders in competition with what we now have, and while competition in some i nstances may drive costs down, we may find that we will not have the ability to control what . . . you know, when you have got all these extra machines, either in terms of quality, never mind the quantity. And that is where my concern is. We have got three or four of a certain type of very high risk, very high priced, machinery . But if we can ensure that not just the members of the Health Council, they would have to bring in experts who know . . . I have a nephew (and I can declare interest ) who actually worked for Johnson & Johnson. And he was a trouble shooter for high risk machinery all across Europe. He has his doctorate in engineering and he worked with Johnson & Johnson all across Europe and Northern Africa was his territory. And he was responsible for going in and ensuring that the high priced technology was effectively calibrated, because it is the calibration of the machinery that determines the effectiveness of the output. And I think that these are things that we have to be in a position to control. So if we have got eight or ten, how many people are we going to have to bring in to be able to ensure that the quality of output is appropriate to the medical care of patients? And I think that we start looking, sometimes myopically, to say that, you know, they are trying to get it . . . as the Honourable Member from constituency 3 mentioned, we are trying to get at , you know , certain individuals. No, what we are trying to do is to ensure that the level of health care that is being provided to the people of Bermuda is appropriate under the circumstances, that it is well presented, and that it is well controlled. Because I do not want to think that I am going into someplace where there is a machine that is not working well and I am being exposed somehow to an inordinate amount of radiation because somebody has not kept it up to date. So what happens in situations like that? Have you ever noticed , Madam Deputy Speaker, when you go for a mammogram or you go to the hospital for an X-ray, as I have had to very recently for my shoulder, when they set you behind that machine that technician runs out of the room . They do not stay there with you . So there has got to be something involved in the fear of the radiatio n that people can be exposed to. And in that regard we have an obligation to ensure that the quality and standard of the machinery that is there is appropriate. In addition to which we also have a standard of duty to ensure that individuals are not expose d to a higher degree of radiation. We do not have electronic medical records, so if I go to Dr. A and I decided that they have X -rayed my arm and it still hurts and I am not satisfied with what he said so I go to Dr. B , Dr. A can order me an X -ray, Dr. B. can order me an X -ray, and I as a patient, ignorant of medical standards can go to Dr. C until I get the answer that I want exposing myself inordinately to an amount of radiation that is inappropriate, but not looking at what could be the long term consequences. So when we have these types of things we want to at least be in a position to know that we are safe in the environment in which we find ourselves. And hence if you find that there is somebody who is prescribing outside of the norm, and I think the H ealth Council has already said that we are not basically finding an inordinate variance at this particular point in time, but are we going to wait until you do get inordinate variances to start to put rules and regulations in place ? Or are we going to arrest that challenge at the outset and say these are the standards, these are the norms, and if you vary outside of your 20 per cent variance then we just might need to look at how our patients are being exposed. And that is the protection that we should be looking at as legislators to ensure that . . . you know, as I said, if I want to do two, three, four, five, six tests , it may be inappropriate. But is there anything that says I go to visit a particular individual or this partic ular clinic or the six or s even machines that are still likely to come across the border and say , I don’t know if I like the reading on this one, I’m going over here, I’ll go over, I’ll go over there? These are the kinds of things that we have to protect against. I think that it is so easy for us to start to think that everything that is being done on the opposite side is geared and honed towards specific individuals. You know, if this were the approach that we took as a Government or even if it is an approach that we have as a thought process, we are in the wrong place. We have an obligation to look at what is the best treatment for all the people of Bermuda in the most appr opriate way and the health care delivery to those people. So I am not going to complain about the makeup of the Health Council because the makeup of the Health Council is exactly according to what was legislated 12 years ago by Members opposite who are now criticising the makeup of the Health Council. We did not hear the outcry then, we ought not to be hearing an outcry today. We also have to rely on the intellect of the people who have been chosen and appointed to do this. You know , it is a tedious task for them. I am sure that the people on the Council , for the most part , are volunteers . Apart from the ex officio members where this is their job —the Chief Medical Council, the CEO —they are volunteers. So they are coming in on a voluntary basis, having to put their heads together to determine what is appropriate to make sure that we
Bermuda House of Assembly protect people, and then they have to go out and seek the level of expertise that is required so that their d ecisions and deliberations are appropriate in a medical context. So while I understand that people may be up in arms and may see it differently, I kind of look at the bigger picture. And the bigger picture that I look at is how we can effectively protect the health and wellbeing of all of our people. And certainly exposing them to the results of certain high risk technologies is not the manner that we use to protect our people. Protection is what we should be about , and sometimes we have to protect ourselves from ourselves. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak? The Chair recognises the Member fr om co nstituency 15, Mr. W. H. Roban. You have the floor.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I think what is being missed today , particularly by the Government side, is that there is a credibility problem. That credibility problem stem s, not from an ything that this House and Members on this side have actually devised. This stems from actions, this …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I think what is being missed today , particularly by the Government side, is that there is a credibility problem. That credibility problem stem s, not from an ything that this House and Members on this side have actually devised. This stems from actions, this stems from performance and results from the Government itself. It stems from the quest to bring about precertif ication. It stems from, Madam Deputy Speaker, the quest to deal with the issue of the mammogram guide-lines. And it also stems from the experience in relation to certain changes to the tobacco legislation. When one looks back at those experiences that the medical community or the gener al community and just the general public has had with the Gover nment in areas of health, it has not been pretty. It also stems from the fact that over the last couple of years the public has been confronted with a steady increase in the cost of certain asp ects of their health care— increases in FutureCare costs, increases in HIP costs—while their income depletes , while seniors struggle to meet these obligations for themselves, making choices to take up other things or take care of their health. Part of the assertiveness that Members on this side have shown with this legislation and what the Government is seeking to bring here on behalf of the Health Council is a result of that experience. And no one in this House can tell us that that has been good. The publ ic has shown their displeasure with the Government in particular , and I am talking about the ge neral public —not the physicians and health care pr oviders . Because let us also make a clarification here : This is not just about doctors, this is also about heal th service providers . So not just doctors are going to be impacted . . . [not] just physicians are impacted by this legislation, it is anybody who has a facility that is a person that is licensed to provide health care, or some health service, and their facility that they use to pr ovide that service. They may be licensed by their governing body, which is principally , in most cases , staffed by doctors or by a health professional who is their peer, but there is also the question that their facility that they use is going to be licensed. Now, as I understand it, I am not a lawyer so I cannot speak with expertise, but there are certain r equirements that other professions have as well in this country. And those bodies that govern their professions are staffed b y members of their profession and even their industry , because essentially the Health Council’s role is not just to poke at doctors, which I think is sometimes said. That is the impression given. No, they have an overall umbrella responsibility. But most of the health professions, allied professions or, of course, the doctors and nurses , they have their own professional bodies that contribute to the overall care and support and benefit of their indus-try and even making sure that they are maintaining the hi ghest level of service in their industry. But here we have had at least three instances that I have mentioned where the Health Council and, by extension, unfortunately, perhaps the Government of the day , have brought about extremely strong rejections from the community. Like I said, the precertific ation issue seemed to go at the heart of whether doctors could even prescribe certain very desirous diagnostic services f or their patients and there was going to be somebody else, who they could not see, some invisible hand, if you want to call it that, out there , that was going to be telling them that they could not pr escribe for their patient that particular diagnostic service. We were then confronted with the effort to make certain guidelines into law here, wh ich seemed to be bringing about a situation where, as in the first case with precertification with the mammogram guidelines, was going to remove choice. Now forget about what the doctors might have said, it was the public that reacted to that in a strong w ay so ultimately the Minister had to pull back. The issue of precertification has been dancing around. Nothing has been brought as of yet , though some people might argue that this might be precertification on the sly. I am not going to suggest that. That i s coming from other quarters, Madam Deputy Speaker. So here we have a question of credibility. It is a question of trust. A feeling, based on past behaviour, past actions, there was a more guarded and pr otective response to anything that the Government and the Health Council brings to the table. That is what we are experiencing here. And despite what other Members in this House may have said in defence, and I must say that I did find, unfortunately, the Minister’s brief to be rather sparse, especially when you con2406 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly sider some of the concerns that I have certainly r eceived from the physician community and from the medical community about what this particular legisl ation is about. I am surprised that the Minister’s brief was so sparse, because there were certai n things that were not answered. And the Honourable Member from [constituency] 31 brought up one of them about the inspections. If this regime that the Health Council is proposing with this legislation is going to bring about a requirement for greater inspection of facilities, equi pment, high risk technology is the term, how is that going to be managed? Who is going to be doing that? How is the cost of doing that going to be managed? Is that going to be a cost then attached to the licensing process? When y ou are talking about somebody giving certification to everything from the MRIs and the CAT scans down to much more simple, or not as large technological aspects of a practice or a service pr ovider, because this is going to bring in dentists, there are other people who provide diagnostic services other than doctors, although we seem to be getting into the situation in this that there is an effort to look at those sinister doctors who have their own offices that provide also diagnostic services. That seemed t o be a major part of this. Now, again, I think part of what we are seeing here, Madam Deputy Speaker, is a perception of mi strust, a mistrust because of the previous experiences that have been a part of some of what has come down around the medical servic es industry. That is what this is about. That is why there is such a strong resistance here. And my own interactions with members of the medical community around this I have found to be very concerning. One experience I had, and this has been within the last 24 hours, someone who is quite active in the medical profession and a part of the governing body that deals with the doctors in particular, they had not seen this legislation. This is somebody who repr esents the medical community —they had not seen it. Now, it was also suggested to myself, Madam Deputy Speaker, that what the medical profession was told at the beginning that this was about seemed to evolve. It started with talking about trying to assess services that were available in Bermuda because the Health Council did not have, other than third party i nformation, on who was providing what, what offices or who was doing what. They only had third party information, so part of the process was just to get a hold on who was providing what. But then it ev olved . And since I was not in the discussions I am relying on what I have been told by persons who were representing doctors and repr esenting the professions . That seemed to evolve into looking at the issue of the self referrals and doctors who . . . okay, so there seemed to be a concern about that. But when they asked , Well what is your data on this activity about whether there is a sign of abuse of physicians or medical practitioners who own their own services and referring their clients to those services? That data was not made available to the physicians so that they could assess that to say , Okay, there is an issue here and maybe we can talk about how we deal with it . The data, seemingly, was not available despite that being a suggestion presented as to why they were doing it. So, you know, I think when you have these i nteractions like this and there is a proposal to do one thing but there is not the data to support the suggestion of what they are trying to do, people get concerned and suspicious. And as I said, we have had other situations with the Bermuda Health Council and the Government prior to now, which have not been pleasant around issues that concern the medical pr ofessionals giving care to their patients and the potential for some intervention or interference, and also making that interaction more costly. These are some of the concerns that were shared. And this whole question of the high risk tec hnology as the Member for [constituency] 31 seemed to refer, I myself looked at the Bill ( and I am not trying to get into anything that is going to be dealt with during the Committee stage). But based on the feedback I got from people in the profession, what is outlined in the Bill may be too broad. Especially when some of them suggest that, Well, you c ould be talking about a stethoscope as well as an MRI machine. Is a stethoscope now a high risk technology item? Is what they use to . . . because they talk about touching the skin. Do you know what they use to hear your heart ? Is that now a high risk technology item? You know there is a question of whether . . . You know, where is the Health Council going? What are they actually looking for? If these definitions are broad for a reason, let us hear why. We did not hear much from the Minister’s brief on som e of these issues that are clearly out there. And let us face it, it has been said already . Bermudian patients are perhaps different from maybe patients in some other island jurisdictions and in some other countries, in that we have had the benefit for quite some time of some of the most modern technology available. And that does not just mean here, but that also means in our interactions in going overseas to places like North America and even the UK. The almost immediate access to the highest quality of care means that there is a certain expectation. Now there may possibly be, but I have not seen the data, and I am not suggesting that there is not the sort of reality, Madam Deputy Speaker, that there is abuse, that maybe our expectations as a community may be a little bit higher than the means which we have available in that there is more prescri bing done than is needed, there is a little bit more diag-nostic activity in certain cases than is needed, and
Bermuda House of Assembly there needs to be some sort of management of that in a better way. Well, fine. Work with the medical community to deal with that. I think part of the problem that keeps coming up with this process and with other situations we have had, like I said, with the precertification and with the mammogram guidelines, is that the level of interaction between the Health Council and the medical professions does not seem to really be in a way that brings about assurance that the process, the direction being taken, is the right one. And then there is a suspicion that there is an effort to over -regulate, overcharge in regulatory fees, and over -control , which will interfere with the provision of care. For the sake of argument one c ould suggest that the cost of diagnostic imaging, when you look at the data that is available, is not the major cost driver of health care in Bermuda. I know that from being the Health Minister once and looking at these issues. D iagnostics are an issue, but there are other drivers that seem to push costs. And some of those are not nec-essarily in the private sector, but in the public area sector. Is there enough attention going to these other drivers rather than going after the drivers or certain aspects that are in the hands of private providers? These are some of the questions and these are some of the interactions that I think have created this sense of suspicion. And I am not so sure that the Health Council, based on what I have been informed of by members of the medical community, has taken enough steps to work some of these issues out. If there i s clear evidence of certain behaviours which merit some of the steps, or even early kernels of possible behaviour, then bring that data to the sight of physicians, the sight of medical professionals who are providing services in Bermuda, whether it be doct ors, dentists, other persons who are providing services, so that the data says what it says and the appropriate steps can be taken to manage the situation. But I get a sense with this particular package of legislation that we are going to be dealing with t hat process which has not gone on, there has not been enough of that process with the medical community. But this has been a repeated behaviour by the Government and possibly the Council . And, hey, I am a Member of the PLP . I was once a Member of the PLP Government . I take full responsibility for the existence of the Council and what its mandate is for. And I be-lieve it was done for the proper reasons. But at the same time there is a role and responsibility here when you have that power to manage it judicio usly when you are dealing with other interests in the community. Unfortunately, in some instances the Health Council and the Minister and the OBA Government have been shown to not be dealing with that. We saw the response to the mammogram guidelines . That was a clear indication that somebody was not listening or not enough was done to address the concerns and fears that were raised by the steps taken. And I think that it is very important in this process to eliminate the fears and concerns that arise. But m istrust and lack of effective communication and understanding limit that ability. What I am suggesting is that is what has got to happen, that the Government needs to pause and take some of those steps to ensure and bring a measure of comfort in whatever t hey are endeavouring to do. We understand that the Health Council’s role is to provide an overall umbrella of management of health care in Bermuda, and that is needed. Insurance companies have all types of interests and perhaps, you know, undue power which some people do not like, because some people, because of the cost of health care . . . everybody is contributing to this cost and to the impacts. You know , some people feel the insurance companies have too much going on. Some people feel even that the hosp ital has got too much going on, despite it being our only hospital . And that is where primary care is given for almost every person who lives here. And there are some people who feel —and I am just giving general ities here, I am not accusing anybody —that doctors and health professionals are just rich fat cats who are just trying to protect their own interests. So you have all these things going on here and you have the Health Council as well. I think it is important, Madam Deputy Speaker, that there should be, perhaps, a pause by the Mini stry. I am concerned that if a member who is a repr esentative of the medical community has only just within 24 hours seen primary legislation, that they said, Well the goal posts seemed to have been moved while we were disc ussing it and something different has evolved. I think that is a concern. I think it is a concern that all the voices may not have been heard. But I will also say this for the other side of the picture, Madam Deputy Speaker . I think that the medical community, particularly the doctors, needs to stop being so quiet around here and just quietly lobb ying us politicians sometimes. They need to get out and speak up for their profession and the interests of their patients , because that is what they should be doing. They should stand up and be counted, not just one or two, and I will say not just Dr. Ewart Brown, who seems to be the unofficial representative of the medical community sometimes with these issues, or one or two , because he is one of the few that I hear getting up on occasion trying to make a case for the other side of the picture. Where are the other physicians? Where are the other health providers? If these things come and they are concerned about them, they should be ma king themselves publicly known. They should be letting their patients who are the general public know, so that they can have advocates as well outside of their own profession, and not seem to be so secretive and closed. 2408 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly So they need to stand up as well. It is not just lobbying us poli ticians here in the House or in other places . Stand up for yourself as well , before it gets to this point . Because some of these discussions were going on earlier and if you had concerns about them you could have come out publicly and talked about them and made us all aware so that you made the general public fully aware of what was going on. This is almost kind of like the eleventh hour in this. So, I am happy to stand and make the points I have made. But I would also like to see others who are actually th e first responders in the profession out there publicly making their case too. With that , I will take my seat. I do hope that the Government will take my comments and those of others on this side with strong consideration because we also desire the best for our constituents, all our residents in regard to their care. I do not believe an ybody in this House does not want 100 per cent assurance that they are going to get the best care from every interest in this country that is providing care and those who manage care and those who have the r equirement of regulating overall care. But we want to ensure that this is always done right and done to the best interests, particularly, of patients. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill entitled Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 13, Mr. D. V. S. Rabain.
Mr. Diallo V. S. RabainMadam Deputy Speaker, I think we get the gist here. I mean we can all stand up and talk about pretty much the same thing and pontificate all we want about these Bills . But I think we all get what we are trying to say here. I ho nestly …
Madam Deputy Speaker, I think we get the gist here. I mean we can all stand up and talk about pretty much the same thing and pontificate all we want about these Bills . But I think we all get what we are trying to say here. I ho nestly hope that the Minister is taking this in and taking advice and, as one my colleagues did point out, rise and report. Rise and report the Bill so we can have some better consultation. Madam Deputy Speaker, the feedback I got, just like everyone else has been getting back, is the consultation is just simply not there. And we are looking at a Bill that is just bringing more regulations on top of bad regulations that already exist , and we have already been given a very clear cut example by the Minister f rom the other side, the last Minister from the other side, that actually spoke to this topic. What she said, Madam Deputy Speaker, was interesting because she said, I can go to Dr. A and get an X -ray and I can go to Dr. B , and Dr. B doesn’t know that Dr. A gave an X -ray and he gives another X-ray. What she is pointing out is bad regulations. And what is the Bermuda Health Council doing to address that issue? Because if that is given as an excuse for bringing another piece of regulation on top of that, why not deal with the regulation that is not working in the first place and figure out how to solve that before you start adding additional burdens on top things that the physicians have to look out for? It seems to just make common sense to me. I did not even think about it until the Honourable Member brought it up. What are they doing to address what is not working now and fixing that, i nstead of bringing new stuff on top of what is not wor king? Because when you do that, the stuff that is not working still e xists. And you know, Madam Deputy Speaker, we hear from that side all the time about what they did over there. Madam Deputy Speaker, this legislation was brought in 2004. And when I look around at my colleagues that sit over here I am hard pressed to fin d one of them that sat in Cabinet in 2004, or Parliament. So for us to come now and argue or debate that probably this piece of legislation needs to be tweaked is because there are fresher, newer, ideas , and we see things differently. And why can those new thought processes not be respected and acted upon? Why has it got to always be this tit for tat, Well you did that 15 years ago, when very few people in here were here 15 years ago to speak to that? So why would we want to continuously use arguments like that to prop up our debates? It just does not seem to make any sense to me. And one thing I have yet to hear from the other side is how this will reduce rates. How will this reduce the burden of payment on the patient? And that, I think, is what the ultim ate goal is, to bring down the cost of health care. But instead we are bringing in regulations that will add administration to health care providers and we all know that they are not going to absorb those costs . They are going to pass those costs on to the client , and when they pass those costs on to the client, the cost of health care goes up. Hearkening back to something that MP Crockwell said , this is too broad. It is absolutely too broad. And Madam Deputy Speaker, I refer to the leg-islation and it says , “‘high risk health technology’ means any medical device or medical equipment used for the purposes of diagnosis and treatment of di sease or rehabilitation which satisfies any of the follo wing criteria —(a) penetrates the skin, tissue and bone.” When you go get a needle it penetrates the skin. How is that now going to be regulated? Every time someone wants to import a needle into the Island do we have to have somebody come and check the box? A scalpel, a common instrument, used to per-form surgery —that cuts the skin —are we talking about
Bermuda House of Assembly [that] ? So you see where I am going here, it is just way too broad. And I can tell you the reason it is way too broad, Madam Deputy Speaker . It is because this le gislation is here to target a particular type of instrument, plain and simple. But we cannot just simply say that piece of equipment, we have got to cover everything to make it seem like that is not what we are talking about. But we all know what we are talking about here, and let us be honest about what we are talki ng about here. We are talking about digital imaging equipment. So if they want to regulate that, put that in there. Why just cover everything else? Madam Deputy Speaker, it is time for us to be honest. It is time for the Government to be honest. It is time for the Government to just say what they are tr ying to do instead of hiding behind all of these rules and regulations that are coming forth to make it seem like we are doing something else—let me distract you over here while I try and sneak something ac ross over here. It is as simple as that. Nothing in this legislation that I have heard from the Minister points to how it is going to reduce costs of health care, how it is going to lessen the burden on the patients, or how it is going to fix the underlying issues that just simply are not working now, which I am very happy to say the Minister of Home Affairs pointed out to us —doctors do not know what other doctors are doing. That seems to be something that can be quickly cleared up and something that the Bermuda Health Council, if they are worth their salt, can quickly grab a hold of and do something with and put some regulations in place. If you want to regulate something, regulate that doctors have to consult each other mandatorily when it comes to this type of equipment. Put som ething like that together. Why are we going to sit around and regulate the importation of this equipment, the implementation of this equipment, at the detriment or harming of any sort of entrepreneur out there that is really tryin g to do something? All the time we sit around here and we talk about enhancing individuals to go and make their own way and start their own business . But all we ever see coming from that side seems to be more and more and more regulation. And that regulat ion stifles entr epreneurship, it stifles business . And at the end of the day, who does that really harm ? The patient , surely . Because now they have less choice, they have less competitiveness because when only a few will survive, you know, having to deal w ith these regulations and all of this stuff , that increased burden. Madam Deputy Speaker, those are my brief comments I really wanted to make because I think everything has been said that needed to be said. Hopefully the Minister is listening. Hopefully the Mini ster will have a change of heart, she will rise and report on this regulation and bring it back and, you know, tweak it, get better consultation than what seems to have happened, and come back with something that we can all be relatively comfortable with and happily say, Hey, this is the way we need to go and we support that. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill entitled Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair calls on the Member from constit uency 36, the Honourable M. J. Scott, Shadow Attorney General, Sandys North. You have the floor. Hon. Michael J. …
Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill entitled Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair calls on the Member from constit uency 36, the Honourable M. J. Scott, Shadow Attorney General, Sandys North. You have the floor.
Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. You know, both past physicians in this count ry way back in our history and past legislators of this House who dealt with the passing of the Radiation Act in this country would be horrified by the proselytization that is going on by Members of the Government benches seeking to justify the better regu lation in 2016 of radiation related apparatuses. This House is not the first radio show in town. The level of clinical understanding of the risk of radi ation has been understood since the French creator came up with the diagnostic tool way back when. And physicians following in after these discoveries have recognised the protocols. The Radiation Bill made in the ’ 80s in this country is more than adequate to look after the protection of both the patient and the technicians using it. And so it is both laughable and suspect that we find a Bill in 2016 that seeks to find its justification, Madam Deputy Speaker, in the protection of the patient and the public by these provisions. It is wrong and it does create a credibility gap with the Minister of Health and with the Bermuda Health Council who purports to have as much responsibility for this piece of legisl ation. As the Minister’s advisor they, too, bear some responsibility. When you get a Bill, yet again, and the Mini ster of Health has gone down this road bef ore as has been indicated, when you get a Bill that you can light upon any number of the provisions , whether it is consultation of this self referral issue’s cost , if you can light on any aspect of this Bill and find something con-cerning about it, it is a bad Bill. It is a bad Bill. And we tried to advise and cajole the Minister that the concerns being raised through us here in the Opposition, from the community , and from the medical fraternity and sorority were worthy of consideration. These were serious c oncerns. So let us look at it. You know, the practice of medicine in this country has been documented as being mercantilistic . It is a business. Two Honourable Learned Members made this point —Mr. Crockwell and the Honourable Learned Member Ms. Wilson. It is 2410 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly a business. And what we are seeing is a leaching away of practitioners practicing within KEMH. Men and women of this country have gotten their qualific ations in medicine in various disciplines and specialties, they come back to this country, they have c reated entrepreneurial endeavours around this long arduous specific training called medicine. They have leached away from driving their money -making endeavours and prayerfully and hopefully it has got to be some clinical advocacy for the patient so that health care and care of the patient goes up. But it is commercial. It is mercantilistic. What we find was happening at the KEMH is that vast amounts of money were being made through delivery of procedures and fees that were connected with the Bermuda Hospit als Board resulting in the physicians practicing within the hospital becoming extremely wealthy. But historically we have begun to see doctors returning to this country , Madam Deputy Speaker, setting up their practices . And we are now in 2016. It is remark able that we find a Minister of Health seeking to raise barriers around technology and technology enhanced diagnostic support in a clinic, in a surgery context. It is remarkable. We are going to see more of it, with the greatest of respect to the Minister, Madam Deputy Speaker . We are going to see more of this in the modern world. The needle probably will have a piece of technology one day attached to it. I have had a blood pressure measured in a practice, I mean that pumping mechanism has completely disappeared. A band is wrapped around one’s wrist . A lady speaks to you and tells you to raise your wrist to your heart level . It then begins to measure your heart rate. It is touching my skin and it is touching patients’ skin and it is measuring one’s heart rate. So the argument by the Honourable Learned Member Mr. Crockwell is right, this def inition is too broad. Entrepreneurship needs to be encouraged. And when the Minister almost leapt to her feet b ecause she heard allegations of targeting, there is perceive d targeting going on in this country with this Bill. Doctors who have been moving into the private sector and enhancing their practices with diagnostic supported technology are feeling that their re- licensure or a second requirement for licensure is adding an extra burden of cost. It is insulting. A doctor qualifies and gets his or her licence and before they can make their practice a brand that is convincing and trusted by the patient they have to apply for yet another round of tiered licensure. It is wrong. It is misconceived. My colleague, the Honourable Learned Member Ms. Wilson, was seeking to be kind to the Bermuda Health Council . But the Bermuda Health Council cannot go on making these kinds of blunders and expect to enhance its credibility in this country. Putting its name behind and its support behind this 2016 Act is a grave error. It is wrong. It has raised far too many questions. And they need to get their act together, they really do. The Minister, again, is going down a path carrying this water on this Bill, yet again, that is going to cause great spillage. It is very hot water for the Mini ster to be carrying. And you are going to start seeing back -peddling going on regarding this for good reason. In the Minister’s brief, the Honourable Minister indicated that this self referral issue, which became a central part of the policy frame in which this Bill seems to be founded upon, became the concern of the Health Council and, therefore, they advised the Mini ster on this point . The only point she made, and it stood out, was that it can lead to excess usage. Well it can lead to that . I wanted to hear the Minister’s brief indicate that it has done so, based on data, an evidence based assessment . Everything I have heard in today’s debate from the Government side is a speech from former Health Ministers about a set of circumstances that do not yet exist in our country. They do not yet exist. And so it makes you question, Well, what on earth . . . and those with whom we have consulted, what on earth is the mi schief to which the Bill is directed? It makes you question it. I opened the telephone book in connection with preparing for this debate and it makes my point good. There has been a growth of health care provi ders in our country. I have listed at least 11. But they are all connected with physicians in this country. For the Minister to gamely rise to her feet on a purported point of order to say that this Bill is focused on the businesses was remarkable. The businesses are connected with physicians. They are inseparable. And so to target their businesses with over - regulation is to target them. And the word “targeted” does deserve a place in this debate today. People feel targeted. Professionals feel targeted. They are i nseparable. And they are inseparable in a modern context that modern technology is going to be increas-ingly a feature of the practice of medicine and most other things in our endeavour. This self referral issue goes on across this country, has been going on since 1880, for heaven’s sake. When I buy a car from a reputable dealer in this country —Bermuda Motors, let us say —we know that the Gibbons Group also has an insurance company. And when the motor company says , We suggest, we urge, you go down to Colonial for the insurance . That is self referr al. How on earth would the Gibbons Company Group feel if somebody passes legislation in this House, or purports to, saying that that is illegal? People feel targeted because this is unequal . This is most unequal. So one is asking the question, Why are you doing self referral regulation and holding guns to our heads in relation to health providers? Why? It is a legitimate question . But the Minister did not answer it in her brief . And it is scandalous that she did not. And that is the water she is carrying an d has
Bermuda House of Assembly chosen to carry and she will do it with all of the risk attending to it. Cost has been dealt with. But it is remarkable that with all of these practices of medicine in our country where there is choice, where there is confidentiality, where trust bet ween the patient /physician relationship is trying to be established, someone has worked out that these growths in the . . . we are a majority black population. Alas , and unfortunately , health challenges are more prevalent amongst the low income black members of the society. They are rushing around this country, Madam Deputy Speaker, trying to deal with their medical challenges . And they have the right to have choice—choice supported by technology . They have the right to. And so it is remarkable. The OBA Gov ernment, because the whole Cabinet is collectively r esponsible for this incredible proposal, has to answer to the people of this country why they are encroaching upon the people’s right of choice. And God knows people are saying, My life is hard enough wit h the cost of living here. If you look at the profile of unwellness in our country , I was the Health Minister at one stage too, I learned these lessons well , hypertension, stroke, cancer, diabetes , and obesity , these are the matters that afflict our population. And so people need to have their right of choice of physicians respected. That was said by the Honourable Learned Member Mr. Croc kwell at the outset , and it was an important point, and it is the right point. And so people do feel that they must ask the question, Why are you targeting this area, which is so important to a society’s well -being —the choice of your doctor. And then we just happen to be blessed b ecause of our location geographically, located near to centres of excellence in Boston . We happen to be blessed with a wealthy or a very wealthy society well serviced by insurance coverage, so as long as you are working you have access to good insurance. For there to be this construct that people are choosing MRIs too much and CAT scans too much, wh at are you going to get when you have got access to it? And what are you going to get when your neighbour tells you, Well, I went and got a CAT scan, it makes me feel better that I have had this diagnostic level of treatment to help make me feel that my physicians are getting to the nub of my problem? You are going to get it. That is not a reason to start targeting the pr oviders of technology supported radiation treatments, and CAT scan treatments, and MRIs. That is co mpletely nuts that the Health Council would move in this direction and then advise the Minister to come to this House and seek to persuade us of this. No wonder . . . it is bound to run into a buzz saw and major oppos ition. Evidence based analysis; rational, reasonable regulation is what we as k for. And, by the way , in 2004 when the PLP advanced and instigated the Health Council it was done on good integrity -filled reasons for regulation. And I think it is important to read some of the opening basis for the then starting of the Health Council. Clearly it was meant to have as one of its important and general purposes to enhance the delivery of health services here in Bermuda, to coordinate health services here in Bermuda, and to regulate. Now when we in 2004 created the compos ition of the Board t hen, I think that is why I got a little confused about when the honourable former Health Minister talked about the composition of the Board. Certainly the PLP did not contemplate or anticipate that when we gave the statutory layout for the composition of t he Board then, we certainly did not contemplate bringing this kind of legislation or this kind of regulation where it absolutely poses the question and begs the question about the composition of the Council making decisions about the wellbeing and both . . . both medical, clinical and business wellbeing of peo-ple, when you do not have experts there to properly look at it. That is the reason why the composition of the Council was established in 2004. Never in our wildest dreams were policymakers of that day co ntemplating this kind of madness and craziness, it just was not there, and that is the reason. So there is a fear of targeting, not just Dr. Brown’s facility, there are 11 that I saw in the [phone] book. We should be encouraging technology support in each of these facilities. And you may find that as the world advances the option to purchase technology to support clinical deliveries is going to increase, and it should be supported. It should be encouraged. And we are getting this again. You get this movin g away from the hospital into independent operators within the private sector . Somebody gets worried that things are getting out of control . And then you get this unwieldy, irrational, barrier -creating happening in our system through legislation. It is wrong. It is completely wrong. And if it is allowed to go through, and I do not think it should succeed, if it is allowed to go through what happens? The King Edward Hospital and the Bermuda Hospitals Board are enhanced in its promotion of it becoming a new m onopoly , and pr otectionism is the rub now. And so the unintended consequence of this kind of mad legislation is to create a monopoly and to assign protectionism to the hospital. And that has got to be wrong, given that it has already been indicated in this House that competition brings down prices. Lord knows the debate in this country over health care costs has gone on since the Anderson reports and the Johns Hopkins report s . . . we have been dealing with this. How could a Health Council worth its salt pr oduce a policy frame that actually completely ignores this point or this issue in this reality and proceeds on driving through amendments and regulations which 2412 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly will have the sum total effect of increasing our costs to the patient? I am not holding back on the Health Council’s misstep on this issue. Either they are—
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMember, speak to the Chair. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Either they are mis -stepping or they are being pushed or forced to engage in giving bad advice to the Government of this day. Significant influence criteria . This goes right to the heart . . . and the influence, without …
Member, speak to the Chair.
Hon. Michael J. Scott: Either they are mis -stepping or they are being pushed or forced to engage in giving bad advice to the Government of this day. Significant influence criteria . This goes right to the heart . . . and the influence, without going into the Committee description, this goes . . . it says if you are capable of influencing a medical or a clinical practice by your relationship to the practice or a family member . . . again, more invasive criteria that goes straight to the heart of the endeavour that I believe I am right in saying should be being encouraged. Not being faced with barriers. Where else in this country have we got this kind of language being introduced into the business affairs of professions or just everyday bricks and mortar businesses in our country ? Where? I quickly googled the consolidated laws of our country to get a good sense of where else this kind of language finds itself. And it is not in the area of businesses or professions. And so, again, you ask , Who is being targeted now with this? The question of targeting rises over and over again in this Bill , and it is wrong. And so it does raise issues of the viability of the advisors to the Minister, the credibility of the Health Council is being put sorely at risk with this kind of legislation. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, there are enough points of concern in this Bill, points of irratio nality, points of policy frame wh ich are completely adverse to what is generally the best practice that is go-ing on both in this country and internationally around the world about what should be being done in the health care space. And this f ibrillation that has taken place today with the bringing of this item is concer ning. It is most worrying and the Minister needs to be sharing these concerns with us. And so I join my colleagues, Madam Deputy Speaker, in describing this Act . . . and the Minister has indicated that the Regulations have been pos tponed. No, Madam Deputy Speaker, the operating and parenting Act needs to be not reconsidered, it needs to be completely forgotten about . It should be completely withdrawn and a fresh start should be made. There is nothing to recommend it; nothi ng at all. It is creating tension. It is creating points of unfai rness . It is targeting, increasingly , practices way beyond the Bermuda health care services, particularly when you stop and think that in the modern world where there is the clinical delivery that is beginning to develop in our Island . . . it is already here. And you know, these doctors, these men and women, do have a legitimate expectation that their practices are going to be successful. After all, they have invested, as I indicated, time and money and blood, sweat and tears in getting it ready. And they know the environment they come back to, they come back to an environment where they have seen that their predecessors made a huge success practicing medicine in this country. And really, wh at we are seeing is a modern evolution of the clinical practices popping up. They are not all in town or on Point Finger Road. They are in St. George’s. They are on the North Shore. They are making a go of what should be anticipated as a good go of the har d work they have put in. They ought not to be faced with barriers and a second tier of licensure. It is remarkably, remarkably inept of the Minister to suggest to this House, or to submit to this House, that this kind of provision were to receive support i n this House. So, those are the matters that I wish to a dvance, streaming through and skimming down many of the notes that I have taken in preparation for this debate on the Bill. I am saying that the Bill is not worthy of our consideration in this House. It ought to be withdrawn. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Learned Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill entitled Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair recognises the Minister of Finance from constituency 11, Devonshire East. You have the floor. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. …
Thank you, Learned Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill entitled Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair recognises the Minister of Finance from constituency 11, Devonshire East. You have the floor.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I thought after presenting four Bills this mor ning that I would have a break this afternoon. And I was intending to do that, but listening to this debate I just thought it might be useful to get some perspective from somebody with an economic background as opposed to the things that I have heard so far. First of all, let me say that there is something in the back of my head, or should I say my gut, that makes me feel uncomfortable with the notion that the medical practitioners are entrepreneurs or busines speople. I just cannot really refute that, but I just feel discomfort with it, when somebody who is going to take a knife and cut me open is somehow an entr epreneur. I am having difficulty with that. But let me make a few points. First of all, I have heard some speakers bas ically rail against this Bill because it is an increased regulation. Madam Deputy Speaker, three of the four matters that I brought already today increase regul ation, three of the four. I dare say that since I have been Minister of Finance, every year I have brought forward legislation in this Honourable House to i nBermuda House of Assembly crease regulation on various and sundry forms of businesses —financial services of all types. Increase in regulation is the way of the world today. As a matter of fact, if we could come back we would want to come back as a regulator, because you know you would have a pretty good- paying job. So if you are going to regulate somebody who is selling insurance or somebody who is selling payments, Western Union payments overseas, if you are going to regulate somebody who is lending money, you sure as heck want to regulate people who potentially have life and death in their hands. You sure as heck want to do that. So, there is nothing in principle wrong with regulating this health care services industries; nothing wrong in principle. And I think that that is a respons ibility of the Government to do that. I think there wer e questions raised as to whether the people who are doing the regulating had the qualifications to do so. But that would be up to the Government to make sure that that is in fact the case, because we cannot have regulators or inspectors who are not qualifi ed. We cannot have that. But, you know, you do not necessarily have to be a medical doctor to regulate medical doctors. You do not have to do that. But there was a point the Honourable Member from constituency 36 . . . yours is the only constituency that I can remember, right?
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It is the highest number there is. —who just took his seat, he made a remark about how competition brings down prices. I thought about that. In general, as a principle, that is true. I guess in economic speak, if you i ncrease the supply the price will go down. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, there is something unique about the medical industry. That is recognised actually worl dwide, except, apparently, in Bermuda. There is som ething unique about the medical sector because in the medical sector the increase in supply of whatever it is does not have any effect on prices at all. If you look at any economic analysis of medical sectors overseas, that is the first thing they will tell you. You know, if you increase the supply of doctors, it is not going to have any effect on how much doctors get paid. This is a worldwide fact. If you increase the number of MRIs, or the number of CT scans, it is not going to have any effect on the increase or the level of prices. That is because of a very peculiar thing in the medical profession. Because it is viewed as a matter of life and death, as a matter of health or sickness, people do not care about the price. They just want it no matter how much it c osts, particularly in a situation where the cost is really funnelled into an insurance programme, because they do not really pay for it d i-rectly. So nobody is going to be shopping around for the best price for a CT scan. Nobody is going to be shopping around, really, for the best price for some sort of branded pr escription drug. That is one of the reasons that branded prescription drugs are so ridiculously higher priced than generics, because nobody shops around for it. Nobody shops around for the cheapest doctor. N obody! So the kind of general laws of economics where if you increase the supply the price will come down does not work in the medical professional sector. It does not. So the notion that the Honourable Member said that competition decreases pric es, in general the principle is true. But it does not apply here because of the nature of the service. It is life and death; it is sickness and health; and it is this intangible relationship that people have with their doctors. They are not going to go to some cheap doctor because the expensive doctor is my doctor, and I trust him. I trust him, or her (as it is increasingly becoming). So, this sort of notion that I have heard here is not correct that the general forces that apply to ec onomic interests in g eneral apply here. I know that lots of studies have been done in other countries that bear this out, particularly when you have, as I have said earlier, the actual fee that you pay is kind of hidden because it is insured. And even if it is not insured, you have the government who comes in and underpins the thing anyway. You know, if you go in to get a CT scan, or the doctor recommends that you go get one, well, you know, there are ways for you to get it even if you do not have any money. But there has got to be a rub somewhere. And the rub here is that everybody in Bermuda pays just exorbitant prices for health care. It has been said that health care in Bermuda is the most expensive in the world. In fact, it is even more expensive than the US, which used to be number one. We are number one now; a dubious championship to say the least. One of the things that is trying to be a ddressed here with the legislation before us, is to try to get control of the cost of health care. Self -referrals seem to be perhaps . . . and I think the Minister’s approach to this is quite reasonable. They are not mak-ing any preconceived ideas, but we are going to sort of have a look -see. And if you are way above the a verage, then there is a problem. You are not going to be able to use market forces in this sector to drive down prices, because the greater the supply the greater the actual use of facil ities is concerned. Particularly, if the use of those facil ities is either encouraged explicitly or implicitly by your medical professiona l, your doctor, and if he has a f inancial interest in it. As I said, you know, I am som ewhat uncomfortable with the notion that all our doctors are in it for the money. I have trouble with that notion.
[Inaudible interjection] 2414 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: You know, they are in it for the money. We always thought that this was a cal ling, and all that sort of stuff, all those sort of noble notions. I understand that they have to get paid, and they have to get paid well, because, as the Member who spoke before me rightfully said, there is a huge investment they make in their lives to become a medical professional, to become a medical doctor. Not just anybody can become a doctor. Not only is it an i nvestment in time, but they have to be really, really smart people to be able to go through all of the hoops that they have to go through. But that does not mean that the society should give them a totally free pass in view of the trusted positions that they hold. I mean, that is what is going on here. You have a ver y trusted position as a medical doctor. But I am sorry, I do not buy the notion that they are above regulations somehow. I do not buy that. So you have trusted people and you have before us an attempt to try to put some more regulations so that the general cost of health care in Bermuda does not go further out of sight. I just wanted to make those points. The last thing I want to say is that I heard the speaker who just took his seat talk about people who have made their investment in themselves and become professionals and all that sort of stuff. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, I have not witnessed any poor doctors in Bermuda. I do not know any. Maybe you do, but I do not know any poor doctors in Bermuda. So, you know, if they go in and they do the stuff in places like, I think Dr. Johnson went and pr ovided free medical services in poor countries. You know, that is great. He could be poor doing that. But you cannot be poor and be a doctor in Bermuda. It is impossible. So we are not talking about folks who are struggling. We are not talking about that. What we are talking about is people who are possibly enhancing their financial model and it is that enhancement that is under the microscope with this legislation and the regulation of that enhancement. That is what I think this is about. And it is totally justified in a country that has the highest cost of medical care in the world. It is our responsibility as a country to do something about it. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much. Are there any oth er Members that would like to speak to the Bill entitled Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair recognises the Deputy Opposition Leader from constituency 18, Mr. E. D. G. Burt . . . oh, sorry, I did not see someone …
Thank you very much. Are there any oth er Members that would like to speak to the Bill entitled Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair recognises the Deputy Opposition Leader from constituency 18, Mr. E. D. G. Burt . . . oh, sorry, I did not see someone else. So you will sit for me to recognise Mr. Commissiong from constituency 21.
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This has been a very stimulating debate. I am sure it has been that for the listeners at home who are listening on the radio. I just want to say right off the top that I am not totally convinced that a for -profit health …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This has been a very stimulating debate. I am sure it has been that for the listeners at home who are listening on the radio. I just want to say right off the top that I am not totally convinced that a for -profit health care system like we have, based more on the American model, is one that is going to be sustainable over the long term, but it is the system that we currently have. And I think the issue that we are faced with now is that you are having a segment of the sy stem comprised of doctors, physicians, who are in pr ivate practice who have developed what I am calling the “clinic” model who feel that the burden of reform, costly as it is to the ir bottom lines, is being placed di sproportionately upon them. For example, although the Minister has said that the hospital itself is under the regulations that have been formulated, and is going to be under the microscope, we see little evidence of that, if at all, in the Bill, when the hospital is the bi ggest generator of cost in our health care system. For example, an X -ray at Bermuda Healthcare Services, and we all know that that is the clinic ass ociated with Dr. Ewart Brown, former Premier, costs $60. The same X -ray at the hospital is $200. So, it begs the question, is this really about cost -cutting or are there other agendas at play? Certainly, we should not be surprised at seeing these types of disparities that a certain segment of health care providers, not only those represented by Bermuda Healthcare Ser-vices and Brown- Darryl [Clinic], but others, like one of my constituents who is a young man, Dr. Kyjuan Brown, who has established his clinic, his model, that is going to be the sort of business that he wants to develop, and he has done a great job on Northshore, who are now feeling, along with people like Dr. Dowling and others that this is not the way forward that is going to allow them to continue to succeed and thrive in this for -profit model. Again, an MRI will cost 20 per cent more at the hospital than at providers such as Bermuda Healthcare Services. Again, if we are talking about the reduction of cost, we are not seeing the evidence. The other thing is we want to have buy -in as much as possible, that is why we advised, coming from the Shadow Minister on down, that perhaps we might want to have the Minister rise and report progress so that the Council itself can redouble its efforts to get the regular consensus, unanimity, amongst all the servi ce providers, because, certainly, a very signif icant number of them are not happy with this. Some may view this as a zealous effort on the part of the Council with the Minister’s blessing, to regulate physicians within this private for -profit model of health care provision in this country. Some will say that this is a Bill, as I have mentioned, that may be viewed as being directed towards Bermuda Healthcare Services and other like phys icians who are in the health care business, and that is an unfortunate v iew that has to be dealt with. B eBermuda House of Assembly cause, like I said, it is not just his practice, his bus iness, but those of others who also are of like mind. The view that this is designed to kill the pr ivate diagnostic sector needs to be allayed. These physicians represent thousands, literally, of patients, Bermudian patients. And those who I can call persons who are perhaps on work permits who are working here who may be from other locations, but also need medical services as provided by these private phys icians. So we think that this legislation is being rushed through. Again, the question arises as to what are the underlying motivations? We should not be surprised that that question is being raised increasingly. And if you would just give me a second,
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongThis question about highrisk equipment, we know that things such as most of the diagnostic equipment that we routinely know and associate with the practice of health care, why the term “h igh risk” as opposed to rather just labelling it as “diagnostic” equipment? Why the term “high risk”? What …
This question about highrisk equipment, we know that things such as most of the diagnostic equipment that we routinely know and associate with the practice of health care, why the term “h igh risk” as opposed to rather just labelling it as “diagnostic” equipment? Why the term “high risk”? What is that meaning meant to evoke in the minds of those who see this? Is there some great inordinate danger in the use of this highly expensive, but nec essary technology? We think that that is an unfortunate nomenclature assigned to that equipment. Doctors then will be required to register their high-risk equipment every year. Why is it that the Bermuda Health Council [BHeC] is trying to scare Bermudians about equipment that is necessary and used every day all over the world by calling it “highrisk” equipment? Again, this raises concerns throughout the community and at least with respect to that segment of the health care community in terms of the provi sion of its services and its ability to do business. I am not going to go on any longer, Madam Deputy Speaker. I just want to say that, again, I want to ask the Minister, as has been the call over on this side of the aisle, to take a pause. Let’s try to g et these health care providers on board, work out a consensus solution that is going to be pleasing and acceptable to a broader cross -section of the industry than that which we are finding right now. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bill? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 18, the Shadow Minister of Finance, and the Deputy Opposition Leader. You have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, you have heard Members, not only of the PLP, but also Members who have no party affiliation in this House, speak about this Bill. I would like to make mention, I think specif ically, to the speech from the Shadow Attorney Gen-eral. …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, you have heard Members, not only of the PLP, but also Members who have no party affiliation in this House, speak about this Bill. I would like to make mention, I think specif ically, to the speech from the Shadow Attorney Gen-eral. I t hink he gave a very powerful summation of the arguments in which we are dealing with on this par-ticular matter today. I think that when speaking about the issue of self-referral, I think that his item was crystal clear. I wonder what would happen, or I wonder if the One Bermuda Alliance would ever stomach passing a law that would say, If you bought your car from Bermuda Motors, you could not get your insurance from Col onial, or you could not get your loan from Clarien Bank? I wonder. Because we know that i n Bermuda there are many organisations that are affiliated, many complementary organisations, many that are owned by large families, many that have their tentacles in many different places, but here we have a piece of legislation which is basically trying to tell persons how they should operate their business. Now, in regard to the regulation being the i ssue, as the Minister of Finance spoke a brief while ago, it is almost as though it was creating a straw man or a red herring because regulation is not the issue. And I think that the speaker who just took his seat made a very powerful point. That it is a question of whether or not the system of health care which we have in Bermuda right now is the best for Bermuda. I would argue that it is not. I think that there would be many people that will argue that it is not, but as he said, it is the system that we have. So the question is whether or not this change will make the system better or worse. If you are not fixing the overall system, how is it all of a sudden, by saying that you are going to be in control of who can import whatever equipment that they need to import, which may support health care technology in Bermuda . . . what about that young man or woman who has always dreamed about owning their own busi ness, and one day wants to open a sonography centre so that persons who may be expecting children can get high-tech ultrasounds? There was a time in Bermuda when you could not get 4D ultrasounds [of] your kids. Now you can. You know why that is, Madam Deputy Speaker? It is because of competition. It is because somebody thought it would be a good idea to bring something new to the table, new to the market, and that is what has come. And if persons wish to pay for that service, they pay more, because, I beli eve, that people are reimbursed at certain rates, based upon schedules. So, if you want to pay more for that, then you pay more for that service. But I could not possibly understand for the life of me, why the Government would think that it makes sense to restrict persons who may bring people in. I really thought that the One Bermuda Alliance, and as they are the child of the United Bermuda Party, I really thought that this was a free market party. I really thought that this was a party that believed in the mar2416 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly ket and can determine . . . and people should have a choice in their health care providers and what they do. I believe that the more competition that you have i nside the market, it is better and not worse. So I have not yet been swayed by the Minister of Health in her opening introductions and the limited contributions from the front bench on that side as to why this makes sense. I can understand when there are some persons talking about tackling utilisation; I can understand that. But if you are talki ng about tackling utilis ation why are you attempting to reduce choice? That is the question which I have. You can attack utilisation in one way, but why are we looking to reduce choice? And the Honourable Member who just took his seat, MP Rolfe Commissiong —sorry, the Member from constituency 21—spoke about that this is seemingly targeted toward some business. But it is broader than that because, as you would know, Madam Deputy Speaker, I just recently had a child. And when I went to the sonography place, because people know that I am in politics, they were asking me what is the Bermuda Health Council trying to do? Why are they trying to get all this information? What is it they are looking to take care of? What is it they are looking to change? The fact is, Madam Deputy Speaker, that this is something that will reduce choice. This is something that will reduce competition. This is something that basically gives the Government the power, and it a ppoints a board who is not elected to pick and choose the winner s. So, all of a sudden we are telling this group of persons that they can determine who can import equipment into this Island and not other peo-ple. That is insane! That is absolutely insane! And to think that a free market party would actually bring legis lation to this House that is saying we are now going to say, No, you cannot import equi pment that may better than the equipment at the hospital because we don’t want you competing with the hospital . . . it is insane. And it seems as though somehow, some w ay, I think it was said yesterday . . . maybe last week in the motion to adjourn, talking about that some per-sons cannot get rid of that old UBP way. Because if this is not about targeting certain businesses, then we really have to ask, what is it about? I t cannot be about costs if other businesses provide the costs at a rate less than the hospital. What is it about? Why is it that in 2016 we are telling women who may want to have 4D ultrasounds that, No, we are going to just make sure that you can go to th e hospital. And we may pr event other persons who have equipment from bringing it in, in the future. It doesn’t seem to make any sense to me. So, I do not need to say any more than that, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think that we have all been very clear on thi s side. This is a bad piece of legisl ation. It is flawed in its intent. It is flawed in its result. It is trying to attack something that it is not going to fix. And if we are really worried about cost, then we should be following the item of increasing tr ansparency in our health care system, we should follow the item of making sure that people can make better and more informed decisions of where they choose to get their health care from. I will just give an aside. I attended the Bermuda Captive Conference this year. It was sponsored by the Government of Bermuda and the Government of Bermuda brought in a health care futurist who talked about health care reform. And one of the things that this gentleman said, Joe Flower, is that compet ition and transparency i s good. The reduction of choice, the reduction of transparency, the reduction of competition only can lead to worse outcomes for patients. We have seen the Government try to do this before. We saw it when it came to mammography. We have seen it in other l ocations. Why is it that this Mi nister continues to try to push things where they are not solving the problem of which they are intending to solve? Minister, I will say . . . sorry, I cannot speak to her, so I will speak through you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would encourage the Minister to look at the overall health care system, to look at the challenges of which we have at the hospital, to look at about i ncreasing transparency throughout the system to possibly look and follow up on some of the research that has been done by persons such as Joe Flower, tal king about how we can reduce health care costs through competition and transparency, and look at attacking it that way. Because the Minister of Finance, who just took his seat, said that we are now the number one health care cost jurisdiction in the entire world, and in 2012 when the One Bermuda Alliance came into office, in their platform they said, We will reduce health care costs, it just seems like one more broken promise. And if on the back of that brok en promise you are trying to say, Oh, no, you can’t go somewhere it costs $60 to get an X -ray, [instead] go somewhere where it costs $200, it seems not only are they are breaking their promise, but now they are exposing themselves for their real and true d uty in this case. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. No? There are no other Members that would like to speak to the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016. The Chair …
Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. No? There are no other Members that would like to speak to the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016. The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Madam Deputy Speaker, I must admit it has been a very fulsome discussion and
Bermuda House of Assembly I am going to try and answer as many questions as I can, because I think it is important —
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: It is important that the Members here and the public understand why this is being done. This Bill, as we indicated earlier, is designed to deal with health technology, it is designed to put emphasis on quality, it is designed to put emphasis on patients. Because the bottom line, regardless of all of this, is that it is the patient that is important. And someone reminded me that . . . and I am just going to use this because I think it is good for us to think about it. “The preservation of health is a duty. Few seem conscious that there is such thing as physical morality.” This is from Herbert Spencer. And the reason I say that is because things seemed to have gone down two paths. One seems to go down the path that there is some individual or some people that we are actually trying to get after. And I will say that right from get -go, that was not the intention. I will not have anyone turn around and impute [improper] motives to the Bermuda Health Council as it relates to trying to go after any individual. The Bermuda Health Council’s job and their mandate is to try and advise me on things which can improve the health care in Bermuda. Things that can turn around and make it sustainable, and they make recommendations along those lines. Now, as I said before, and I want to reiterate, the Bermuda Health Council has two doctors on there. And the doctors that are on there try and make sure that they advise the Council, and they advise me. But on top of that, the Bermuda Health Council has a range of other subcommittees —
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: They have a range of other subcommittees that have individuals working on that. As we go forward and we talk about all of this . . . someone said something earlier, and I am just going to finish with that and then I am going to work my way backwards through all of the recommendations. This, what we are bringing here, is s omething in a stream of actions that the Bermuda Health Council were trying to take. Right now the Bermuda Health Council —
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMinister, can you speak to the Chair please? Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Sorry. Sorry, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Bermuda Health Council is already looking at health system reform financing. And the health system reform financing will deal with things like the cost of the various establishments and what does it …
Minister, can you speak to the Chair please?
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Sorry. Sorry, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Bermuda Health Council is already looking at health system reform financing. And the health system reform financing will deal with things like the cost of the various establishments and what does it cost for a particular test in entity “X” versus entity “Y .” That type of stuff is being taken care of. It will also look at making sure that we start to talk about the level of expenditure because the suggestion was made earlier about Bermuda having the distinction (and I say “distinction” because I don’t really believe it is a distinction) of having the highest cost per person of health in the world —$11,000 per person, that is preposterous. And, the reason you have that is be-cause you have people out there, and I heard Mem-bers, and I was just . . . I could not believe it, that wanted to say just because we can afford it, that we can turn around and spends lots of money because we can afford it. Are people not understanding —
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Your point of order is? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongThe Minister is misleading the House. I do not think any of the Members here said that, that one is in favour of wanton spending. I think what the Members were saying, I think the concern was that the disproportionate burden for reform was being placed on one group, one …
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Thank you, Mad am Deputy Speaker. I was going to come to this later on, but since it just popped up, women who want to have 40 ultr asounds said it is all right? People do not understand …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Thank you, Mad am Deputy Speaker. I was going to come to this later on, but since it just popped up, women who want to have 40 ultr asounds said it is all right? People do not understand that these things have negative effects on your health. And that is the bottom line, so I am going to turn around and I am going to go through and I am going to deal with the concerns as they have been raised. If they are concerns that are duplicated, then I will just move on. Okay. So as it relates to what we are trying to do. We are not trying to destroy private sector bus iness because as the regulations are set up, individuals will be able to turn and be licensed. They will be able to turn around and indicate why they are able to be in that particular business and, once they get their licence, they will then be subject to the normal r eviews. So we are not trying to get to other constit uents. We have no one here that we are looking out for. When these regulations were sent out, they were sent out to all of the providers. Every provider w as given 2418 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly the opportunity to be able to come up and provide i nput as to how it would affect them. And I think that what is important as we go forward is for us to be able to understand that the providers that are out there are not just doctors. We act like they are the only people. You know, you have a whole range of people out there. And as it stands, there are some providers out there who are not regulated. And so you have issues of quality. You have issues of us trying to make sure that everybody, every provider, is regulated because that improves the quality. And on top of that, as we go forward, you know, you talked about who are the pr oviders? Well, you have about 334 providers in Bermuda. And I think what is significant for me, about 245 of them have already voluntarily registered because they understand that it is beneficial, and something is coming so they are registered. So as we go forward we will be able to demonstrate that there is a reason and there is a benefit for regulation. I have heard time and time again about ev idence- based and being able to say why we are doing this. I would just remind you that in about 2014 there was a question about over -utilisation and the doctors said to us, Prove it. Tell us what’s happening. So for the last two years we have been supplying information every six months to show the amount of lab tests that are being ordered, the amount of diagnostic imaging tests, and it has been showing that there has been a 4 per cent reduction in diagnostic imaging and an 18 per cent reduction in labs ordered. But, as you go forward, you have to say, This is good, but it also means that if it can go down, that drives the cost of health down, because the claims will go down, the premiums should go down, and we should have what we hav e all been asking for, a reduction in the health expenditure. Now, the one thing I want to say because I did not get into all the regulations, and I do apologise for not getting into all of that because I did not want someone to say that I am talking about something that is coming, but I will take the opportunity because questions have been asked, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerBut be very, very careful b ecause we cannot pre- empt. Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: No, I am just going to answer the ques tions. I am not going to pre- empt. But just to indicate that . . . and I am going to deal with the part of …
But be very, very careful b ecause we cannot pre- empt.
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: No, I am just going to answer the ques tions. I am not going to pre- empt. But just to indicate that . . . and I am going to deal with the part of the Act that deals with the regul ations because that is the part that I believe I can deal with. So, as it relates to that, if we understand that b y turning around and having this information that we have been gathering over the last two years of the percentage of the utilisation, and when I stood up ear-lier and I talked about what was happening in North America and what was happening in Bermuda, we then get the opportunity to see what our average or-dering pattern is for Bermuda. And, remember, these things are based on specific tests. They are not blanket; they are specific tests. Every specific test will have a number associated with it and an average, and if somebody is over that number then that rings a bell. And that rings a bell as it relates to, potentially, is this person over -utilising it and that is where you are tal king about having a discussion about whether they have a particular client ba se and whether there is a reason. So, nobody is trying to turn around and say to an individual, You cannot have this test. You cannot have this relationship between yourself and your doctor. All we are saying as we go forward is that you have to recognise that if you are over the average, then there has got to be a concern. Either the concern is that you have a patient base which is unusual, or you are doing something and you do not understand that other things are out there, and therefore you are duplicat ing. And so these are the things that . . . and because now people are understanding that it is not about just do everything as . . . better to do more than less. People understand now that it is better to do less than more because you have a harm aspect. And so it is very important as we go forward to make sure that when we look at this, this whole question of utilisation comes up. I know that there was talk about someone tr ying to characterise our party as . . . I am not even sure. . . I cannot even remem ber . . . the free market party. Well, I do not know who came up with that, but all I can say to everybody is that I believe our party is a party that wants to look for fiscal prudence, that wants to turn around and make sure that as it relates to the heal th that we encourage good health outcomes for our citizenry. And that being the case, you have to then turn around and recognise that as we go forward, if we look at things that are impacting the cost of health, and we know that the over -utilisation drives the cost of health up, we have to say that it is not about free market enterprise. And if everybody was honest and looked around and reminded themselves in going bac kgrounds, we are where we are now because we effectively did have a free market thing that said, Okay, if it is out there, bring it in. And as Minister Richards said, that has had negative effects because if you bring it all in and if everybody is utilising all of these things, you end up having everybody using all the tests, and having the ne gative consequences and the cost of health goes up. So now, I am not turning around and saying that I am stopping anybody or this legislation stops anybody that is already in existence, but you know what it does say? And it happens in other places. It says, if we already have three machines and the World Health Organization, or other [entities], say that in a population our size three is sufficient, then you have to ask, Why would you bring a fourth in? B eBermuda House of Assembly cause it doesn’t make sense. What is going to end up happening is that someone is going to feel that if a fourth comes in and they have to turn around and they have to drive it. Now, I make the point and I accept this, that as we go forward I am all for making sure that when business people and young peopl e come into Bermuda they have the opportunity to go ahead and practice their craft. But you know what? I am going on the basis that if we deal with medical workforce planning and let people know the areas which are saturated and the areas that are open, I am hoping they will go into the areas where Bermuda needs them so when they come home they can hang up their shingle and they can make a good living and it will not be an i ssue. So, there are these types of things that we have to turn around and we have t o focus on. And so when I start to talk about this thing about “targeting,” the only targeting thing that we are doing is targeting the fact that there is an area where there is a lot of cost associated with it. And if that is the case, and you want to try and bring the cost of health down, why not target that area because you can do something as a result. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, I am not able to turn . . . and we have heard lots of discussions about the definition of “high -risk diagnostics.” Now, the reason we targeted that is because it is twofold. One, “high risk” is something which has a great risk attached to it and [two], because it is something that has a great cost associated with it. So if you are going to try to turn around and reduce the cost, let us look at the areas where, one, there is cost and there is utilis ation. So, as it relates to the definition, I know that that definition (if I remember correctly) came from the World Health Organization. So from that perspective, I know that I hear pe ople turning around and saying, It makes it sound like it ’s everything and anything. Well, I am sorry; when I read it I did not get the impression that it was everything and anything. I read it and I got the impression . . . they talked about four different things. It had to do those things, and if it did those things, it was [considered] high risk. And then it gave some examples. Madam Deputy Speaker, I am sorry, and I cannot go around talking about how people stretch their interpretation, but my understa nding is that that was the definition that was given from the World Health Organization. So I will say that because I think it is important that we clarify that. Not that I just picked that out of my head, or the Bermuda Health Council, because the Bermuda Health Council, by and large, does try and make sure that it reaches out to other organisations, especially world organisations, b ecause that is the benefit of being in Bermuda. We are a part of these bodies. We get to receive information about what is ha ppening out there. We get information to help us determine some of the direction but also if we are looking at some of the choices that we have to make, it is something that we can do. Now, I want to make this absolutely clear. KEMH [ King Edward VII Memor ial Hospital] is one of the providers. Okay? I cannot make that any clearer. They are one of the providers and when we listed all of the providers that the information was sent out, and I am pretty sure that I indicated in my brief that they were part of t he people that were consulted. So there is no question that KEMH will not be subject to our review. Now, with respect to, Why wouldn’t we want physicians do to more? You know, there is a balance between the Acute Care Hospital and the things they do and th e physicians out in community. And I am all for . . . and I keep driving home that I want to see ph ysicians taking more care of their patients. I want the Acute Care Hospital to do what it is supposed to do because that way we have the good balance. So, I am not going to dwell on anything more than that to say that this is not designed to take away from that, it really would go forward. So, I want to stress this whole question of collaboration. The Bermuda Health Council put on its website the collaboration document, last year. And as you know, during the year they have been reaching out to any numbers of individuals. They have been provided input and making adjustments, et cetera, which is why a number of turned, and as I say, a number of things actually di d the registration voluntarily. The cost about doctors, I have already told you about the fact that we have three doctors already on it. In terms of financially vested referrals, you know the thing that I found was interesting, and it is one of those things that you sometimes think that Bermuda is another world and we act like, you know, nobody does it and everything just happens differently. I decided to go and look up “financially vested health referrals” and you know what? What then came up was the fact that in Washington State they had a Certificate of Need [CON]. And when you looked at it, what it was, it was if you wanted to turn around and do something, either if you wanted to introduce a new facility, or if you wanted to do something with equipment, if you wanted to do anything, you had to turn around and you had to apply for a Certificate of Need, and you would have the state turn around and determine whether you were going to be able to introduce that. Bermuda is no different. We have 55,000 people. We have a limited number of people here, we should be able to turn around and know over time, based on the ratios, how many people, how many pieces of equipment, what type of equipment we need. So, we called it a licence. But in your mind all I am going to say to you, just think of it as a Certificate of Need, because basically, anybody who is here has a licence. But going forward new people will have to turn and ask. They are bringing it in and would [have 2420 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly to] explain why they believe it is beneficial to Bermuda, and so in the end it is not just about being a professional because you are a doctor, a lawyer, whomever is a professional, but it is also saying you want to set up a business. And the business then is your Certificate of Need and then you demons trate why the business should be there. The other thing that I found when I went and I looked on the website was the fact that there was in Oklahoma [State], there was this facility that had this financial policy and when you read down through it, they we re talking about the fact that if you are a p atient, thank you for choosing them, and they talked about they are going to do everything, all the best for you, et cetera, which I believe everybody in Bermuda, if you are [a patient], you expect your physicia n to say to you that they are going to do the best, and then do their best. But the one thing that they said, that they had at the bottom of this form, was an ownership di sclosure. And what it says, is that these physicians hold a vested interest in the following facilities , and they laid out the facilities that they held interest in b ecause, from their perspective, they needed you to know that they might refer you to this particular facility and you need to know that there is an interest. And on the bottom line it also indicated that this was required as part of a statute in the particular state. All I am saying to you is that . . . and I r emember when I first came home and I went to a pr ovider who actually has a facility. He said to me, You can have this t est done here or you can go to the hospital. And at that stage I said, Oh, I am going to have it done here because I thought I wanted it for ease. As we go forward the whole question of comparative costs will be dealt with in the health system reform refinancing. So I am telling you that that is something that will be dealt with later. For now, I am just saying to you as it relates to the referral, you have to understand that if people have this equipment and they can make the referral, people need to be able to understand and it needs to be brought to their attention. By bringing it to their attention, that particular provider reinforces his bond to his patient because he is telling his patient, I am letting you know that I might send it there. Because the patient can do one of two things, they could say, That’s fine. At least you are telling me. Or say, No, I don’t want to do that. But at least it is up front and it is not doing anything to the credibility of the person. Now, going forward there has been t he suggestion that guidelines . . . when we get into the reg ulations, we will obviously talk about the fact that regulations is where you have guidelines. I cannot get into all of that, but all I can say to you, you know over time, every time we come up wi th something there is some guidelines that go behind it and the Bermuda Health Council has been working with the providers to talk about appropriate guidelines and something that they all agree on, and if nothing else, the Bermuda Health Council has many l ittle subcommittees which have lots of other individuals on there where they get t ogether and they talk about what is relevant and appropriate to their particular field. I think afterwards, I am just going to skip through after that, just to indicate that . . . someone made the reference about health care has become a business and you need to strike the right balance b etween profit and competition. And you are right. It is important for us to understand that it has become a business and, unfortunately, from my perspective this goes a long way to try and strike the balance because it does not say that you cannot have business. It does not say that you cannot make the referrals. All it says is that once you have the business . . . and do not forget, part of all of this says that you get registered and once you are registered you have information which you fill in. Once the information is filled in, that is when people know the number of businesses you actually [have]. Because most times right now people do not know how many businesses you actually are involved in. How many businesses —and I am talking about businesses which are medical -type businesses. I am not talking about what I call the real “private,” but at least this way if you have to indicate the medic al-type businesses you are in, it enables people to understand clearly the possibility of conflicts of interests as it relates to financially invested referrals. So that is why it is important to have the registration process because going forward it sets a benchmark, and once people apply after that and they are accepted to have the referrals, then you go on and do your business. And if you are going on doing your business as normal, et cetera, fine. But if you are 20 per cent above the average, as I said, you are going to have someone turning around and saying, Why? And that is what is important. So that is where you end up having . . . and we were talking earlier about the right balance b etween profit and competition because sometimes you can, when you have this increase of equipment which you have bought and which you are then trying to pay back, et cetera, sometimes find yourself driven by the profit element and then go all out for the competition. And if that is the case, that means you are doing lots of tests, you are offering lots of extra services, et cetera. That in itself does not necessarily mean that it is a bad thing, but it could mean that you have an over - utilisation and you have things . . . because you know what somebody reminded me of? And I know that you never stop and think about this. They reminded me that there was discovered that there was lots of tests being done to make sure if the people had enough Vitamin D. Now you know what that means. If you [live] in sunny Bermuda, et cetera, y ou should not really be worrying about that.
Bermuda House of Assembly [Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: I am not saying if you do not stay in, but if you find somebody doing that a lot, then you have to think to yourself, Okay . . . All I am just saying is that this is where sometimes when you start to look at over -utilisation and that is why you have benchmarks and the benchmarks are averages, and that is what you look at. I am just saying that . . . and as Minister Ric hards said, Competition doesn’t actually , in the health care industry, drive the cost down. Because as he said, you say to yourself, I don’t care what it costs. I am going to have this test. And I know we all know of examples where people said, You went to Doctor “A” and Doctor “A” said you are fine. And you said, But my friend went to that doctor and he sent him for this test. And before you know it, off you go and you have it too. And I am not using anecdotal stuff. I am sa ying that these things do happen whether we like it or not. And if that is the case, there is over -utilisation. So, we are turning around, and as we go forward this is why we are saying that if we can reduce over - utilisation, we can actually reduce the cost of health care because it will drive the premiums down, and that is what we all want. We want healthier people, but we also want the cost to go down. So, I am not saying anything about the rel ationship between the patient and the doctor, and I believe that if you start to look at high- risk technology, if you look at it in the way the World Health Organization looked at it, I believe you will realise that it is much more restrictive than has been suggested. I believe that the interpretation has been put on it and I cannot go around and look and sort of say, If you looked at this line, and you say this says “N” and includes and doing all the other stuff. But when I read it, I read it as much more limited in saying that afterwards the suggestion that it was the CAT scans and MRIs, et cetera, was , if you will, a way of indicati ng what they were rather than saying it was in addition to what was said above. Okay? So that is the way I am looking at it. In terms of striking the right balance, there was a question that was raised with respect to the section that talks in there about inspectors. Now, I just have to remind us here that the legislation then before basically said that public officers could be inspectors. Well, we know as we go forward, there is more, a greater range of equipment and technology out there. So what was inserted was that inspectors could be appointed in addition to public officers. So that way you were able to turn and appoint inspectors who have the credentials and expertise in the various ranges of high- risk technology that we need. Okay? That gave us, gave the Bermuda Health Council, gave the Minister , the ability to make sure that people that had the experience could be appointed. And I am not going to get into the fact that right now it already says that public officers, nobody says how do you make sure of what the qualifications are, but the guidelines will turn around and it will be clear that when somebody is appointed as an inspec-tor, if it is the inspector that deals with the radiology equipment or some other, or the nuclear medicine, they will bring that area of expertise and part of the qualification will be there. I think we have to rely on the fact that that is the type of stuff that will get done properly. With respect to consultation, all I can say to you [is what I said] earlier, that the consultation has been done and it has been out there. I know that at one stage there were some concerns with some doctors about how it would work, et cetera. And I believe the Bermuda Health Council has gone a long way to allay those fears to, one, make sure that they have gone out and worked with PAHO [Pan American Health Organization] and WHO [World Health Organization] in terms of guidelines. They continue to work with the practitioners to talk about how it will work, and they have been having small meetings with the pr oviders to be able to flesh out what I call the guidelines. Because you always have regulations and then you have guidelines. So that is well in hand. And the nice part about this is that the doctors that have been coming out, they are doing w hat I hoped more would have done. They are coming out and they are providing the input so that the Bermuda Health Council can tweak it in the right way. I am sorry people; I do not know why people seem to feel that waiting back and then sort of “throwing i t over” is g oing to help us as we go forward. Come out, have the conversations, and they have had feedback and the feedback has been on their website and we will co ntinue to move forward with this and make sure that as we go forward the regulations . . . and as we discuss it, hopefully everybody will see that the regulations have had a fair amount of input and are things that the doctors themselves have asked for. I remember when I was first Chairman of the Bermuda Health Council, I remember a whole list of things that came from the then Medical Doctors Ass ociation of things that they believed that we would do. And I have seen some of the lists in terms of the Bermuda Health Council working their way through that list. So it is one of those things where it is a combination. But I think the one thing that I wanted to r emind everybody of is the fact that part and parcel of this is that this regulation then includes a whole range of individuals previously out there who have not been regulated. So this means that the providers that are now going to be covered by it will have to register. They will be subject to some review. That means that the quality then improves and the bottom line is it is better for Bermuda because you can turn around and you can talk about the qualifications that whoever you 2422 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly are going to has . . . making sure they are registered. If you have a complaint, it is in the process and they are able to do that. So all of these things are positive and have nothing to do with the doctor/client relati onship. I believe we keep forgetting about the quality aspect of it, and the cost, and the fact that if you do not deal with it properly, you could end up doing some harm. I think that . . . I want to be sure because I know once I get into Committee ther e might not be anything that I would be able to . . . 89 per cent of the physicians have registered with the Bermuda Health Council, and that is why it is important to get that message across —89 per cent of the physicians have registered with the Council. Okay? And also I want to turn around and say that, you know, we talked about the original Act and I am not going to get into the original Act and why it was not brought in, because it has taken us a bit of time to get it right as it relates to trying to m ove this forward. I am not saying that there are not some changes that we are actually going to make going forward, but I do think that we have tried to put the right balance in terms of making sure that we protect the patients, making sure that we have a proper registration sy stem, and making sure that we do things that will e nhance the quality of care but also ultimately reduce the cost. And with respect to the suggestion about data not being available and utilisation, as I just said ear-lier, I told you about the fact that for the last two years the Bermuda Health Council has been giving this i nformation, they have been giving it to the providers, they have then been letting people know who is outside of the average. So this is part of the data, so it is already out there. I think I have done all that I want to do. Okay. Registration . . . okay, we have done the two years. Okay, health providers. Okay, impact on the patient; we are not doing any harm. Improving the quality, we talked about the Vitamin D. The reason I am doing this is because all of you wanted to stand up and speak because you believe you had a contribution. I appreciated that. And I wrote down everything that you said. And I wanted to be sure that there is nothing here . . . and, as I say, and I keep saying this about the thing about KEMH because a couple of people said it. As you go forward, they are part and parcel of this whole process. And we have already talked about high risk technology. And as it relates to Minister carrying the hot water, well, okay. I am here. I will keep carrying the hot water because, as I told you earlier, we know that health issues are one of those things which are very difficult. They are very emotive, but we also know that we have to try and do the right thing, so that is what I am doing. I have been very fortunate that the Bermuda Health Council has reached out. And I think people need to understand, as I have said, it is not just the people there; they have lots of other subcommittees who are working with th em. I have talked about workforce development planning. Right. I think also the last thing I want to say before I sit down is that each time we looked at these things we have to try and make sure that we do not do something that has unintended consequences. And that was why when we started to look at this we said that, as I say, we are not targeting anybody. People are able to go ahead, they will continue to operate their practices but they will be reviewed as it relates to how they do them, in terms of the volume and what is happening, and we will be out there educating the p atients to basically say, Understand how these rules work. Make sure that you know if your practitioner is registered. I am amazed at the number of people who go to people and have ser vices done on them or to them by people who are not registered. And so going forward this is making sure that all of those persons are registered and you will be able to be sure. And if I can finish off at the end to say that there is no other agenda at play other than improving the health of the population in Bermuda. There is no other agenda at play other than turning around and making sure that the quality of the providers that are out there is up to the level that we would want. There is no other agenda out there at play other than if, as a consequence of doing this, we are able to reduce util isation, which is unnecessary utilisation, and thus drive the cost of health [care] down, then I would be really pleased to be able to reduce the premiums because I know that everybody in Bermuda is all worried about the cost of health care, and so are we. So that being the case, as I say, there is no other agenda other than the agendas we just talked about. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMinister, you need to . . . Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: I will go to the next. Sorry. ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER HOUSE VISITORS
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerWhile you are getting your notes together, the Chair did recognise that Senator Renee Ming was in the room. But I would right now like to take the opport unity to recognise MP Tim Smith, who once upon a time sat in this Honourable House. [Second Reading debate on Bermuda …
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMinister? Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to move that the Bill be committed.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerIt has been moved that the Bill be committed. The Bill entitled Bermuda Health Cou ncil Amendment Act 2016. Any objections to that motion? Some Hon Mem bers: Yes.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThere are objections to that motion so we will take names. [Inaudible interjection]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerWe need to . . . are there any objections to that motion? The answer was no. Are there any —
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerUnder normal circumstances we do go into Committee. So when we go into Committee, we will then move any amendments that might be available, and we will go from there. The Chair would like to recognise the Member from constituency 20, Susan Jackson. House in Committee at 7:10 pm COMMITTEE …
Under normal circumstances we do go into Committee. So when we go into Committee, we will then move any amendments that might be available, and we will go from there. The Chair would like to recognise the Member from constituency 20, Susan Jackson.
House in Committee at 7:10 pm
COMMITTEE ON BILL
[Ms. Susan E. Jackson, Chairman]
BERMUDA HEALTH COUNCIL AMENDMENT ACT 2016
The ChairmanChairmanHonourable Members, we are in t he Committee of the whole House for further consider ation of the Bill entitled Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016 . Minister. Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: This Bill seeks to amend the Bermuda Health Council Act 2004 (the principle Act) to bring into effect …
Honourable Members, we are in t he Committee of the whole House for further consider ation of the Bill entitled Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016 . Minister. Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: This Bill seeks to amend the Bermuda Health Council Act 2004 (the principle Act) to bring into effect section 13 of the Act authori sing the Bermuda Health Council (the Council) to l icense health ser vice providers, to prohibit financially vested referrals, and to regulate the importation of high risk health technology into Bermuda. Madam Chairman, I wish to move the clauses in groups. I will move clauses 1 through 4.
The ChairmanChairmanOkay. It has been moved that clauses 1 through 4 . . . would any one like to speak to clauses — Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: And I will move them first.
The ChairmanChairmanYou want to move them? Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: I need to say what they are.
The ChairmanChairmanOkay. Hon. Jeann e J. Atherden: Clause 1 is self - explanatory. Clause 2 amends section 2 of the principal Act by inserting definitions for “financial interest” “f inancially invested referrals” “high risk health technology,” “interest,” “self -referral,” and “significant infl uence.” Clause 3 amends section 5 of the principal …
Okay.
Hon. Jeann e J. Atherden: Clause 1 is self - explanatory. Clause 2 amends section 2 of the principal Act by inserting definitions for “financial interest” “f inancially invested referrals” “high risk health technology,” “interest,” “self -referral,” and “significant infl uence.” Clause 3 amends section 5 of the principal Act by providing for the Bermuda Health Council (the Council) to issue guidelines, and to monitor high- risk health technology and regulate its importation into Bermuda. Clause 4 amends section 14 of the pr incipal Act by amending the section heading to refer to health service providers. It also provides for the Minister to appoint persons as inspectors.
The ChairmanChairmanWould anyone like to speak to clauses 1 through 4? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 16, Shadow Minister of [Community Affairs and Health].
Mr. Michael A. WeeksYes, Madam Chairman, thank you. Madam Chairman, after almost two, maybe three hours of robust debate asking the Minister to rise and report or at least withdraw the B ill and get further consultation, we find ourselves still here. But just a comment I want to make, that I heard …
Yes, Madam Chairman, thank you. Madam Chairman, after almost two, maybe three hours of robust debate asking the Minister to rise and report or at least withdraw the B ill and get further consultation, we find ourselves still here. But just a comment I want to make, that I heard that most doctors seem to be registered. But from my hom ework, Madam Chairman, I think it would be doctors were told either to register voluntar ily last year or be forced to do it. So, they were forced to do it under duress. So, rather than go through any of the clauses individually, I would just say that the Minister, again, is not listening to the will of the people. So I have not hing else to ad d other than she should take her time. Why rush this? There is no need to rush this. We could come back and deal with it at a later time.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Would anyone else like to speak? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 31. 2424 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly Mr. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Madam Chairman, I refer to clause 2, which is amending section 2 of …
Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 31.
2424 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly Mr. Shawn G. Crockwell: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Madam Chairman, I refer to clause 2, which is amending section 2 of the Act which is the definitions section, and particularly I refer to the definition of high-risk health technology. I raised this in the House, Madam Chairman. I am just wondering if the Minister would not agree that the definition is in fact covering almost every single medical instrument that you can think of. Not just what . . . and I find it interesting, Madam Chairman, that the last paragraph seems to be the machines that I think the Minister and the Bermuda Health Council are really honing in on. We are talking about CT scanners and MRI machines and X - ray machines, and things that are in relation to radiology. That seemed to be the foc us of the debate. That seemed to be the focus of the high costs in terms of these procedures. But why would it have “any medical device or medical equipment used for the purposes of diagno-sis.” I mean, how many pieces of equipment could that be? And “treatment of disease or rehabilitation, which satisfies any of the following . . .” and the follo wing are: • penetrates the skin, tissue and bone— well, we have heard individuals talk about a needle penetrates the skin; • makes contact with the skin, tissue and bone of significant duration; • affects the vital organs including the heart, brain, and lungs, et cetera.
The purpose of this, Madam Chairman, is to make all of these items prohibited. So basically, this piece of legislation is making prohibited every single piece of equipment that is used in a medical facility, which then transfers to that particular health service provider the burden of having to get a certificate for every single thing. This is overkill. Now, if the issue is CT sca nners, MRI machines, et cetera, then let us do that. But the complaint is it is too broad, it is too onerous, it is going to create administrative challenges, too much bureaucracy, and it is overkill. Now, I would like and invite the Minister if she can address that issue in relation to this definition which clearly seems to be over the top. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Member from constituency 34, Sandys South Central.
Ms. Kim N. WilsonThank you, Madam Chairman. Actually, I want to go as an extension to what the honourable and learned friend who just took his seat spoke to, and does that speak specifically to clause 2, high risk health technology. My first question is if the Minister could pr ovide to us …
Thank you, Madam Chairman. Actually, I want to go as an extension to what the honourable and learned friend who just took his seat spoke to, and does that speak specifically to clause 2, high risk health technology. My first question is if the Minister could pr ovide to us where that definition could be found. I thought I heard the Honourable Minister indicate that it was from WHO, and I have scurried through for the last two hours the WHO website as well as the other pieces of information on their website, and I do not even see the phrase “high risk health technologies.” I am hopeful that the Honourable Minister will explain to us where that definition comes from. Secondly, in an extension to what the Ho nourable Member who just took his seat [said], which concerns me, and I am dealing specifically with cla use 2(b), “makes contact with the skin, tissue and bone of significant duration.” Makes contact with the skin—I am thinking of an example of an injury that I just suffered six weeks in a cast. I know the Honourable Member who is the Minister of Home Affair s is wea ring one, and that is the bandages that the physi otherapists put on our injuries to help in recovery. That is obviously something that makes contact with skin for long duration. So if we are going to specifically apply the law as we are being asked to process and pass today, that means that a person that is providing bandages —
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Madam Chairman, point of order, if the Member will yield. I think the Member is misleading the House. When it says . . . my understanding here is that this is conjunctive, not disjunctive. So it speaks to those things which makes contact with skin, tissue, and bone —makes contact with all three. Not skin tissue or bone. So if something just contacts skin, like this ban-dage that my honourable friend has here, it would not meet the criteria. It is skin tissue and bone. It is conjunctive, not disjunctive.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Member, you can continue.
Ms. Kim N. WilsonThank you. And I will allow the Minister to answer that question because I do recall the Minister speaking with respect to shots, which, if I got a shot and hit my tissue and my bone, I think I would be screaming as would anybody else. So I will allow …
Thank you. And I will allow the Minister to answer that question because I do recall the Minister speaking with respect to shots, which, if I got a shot and hit my tissue and my bone, I think I would be screaming as would anybody else. So I will allow the Minister who is leading this debate to explain if that is conjunctive or not. However, I would submit that it is not because of the reference the Honourable Minister spoke to concerning a needle. So, again, bandages, such as the bandages that are provided for by physiotherapists would fit into these criteria. So that means a health care professional, such as my physiotherapist, would have to make an application to the Bermuda Health Council to pay a fee because she has to get a certificate for entry so she could bring in the physiotherapist tape.
Bermuda House of Assembly Likewise , Band -Aids. One of the things that I had on my arm for several weeks after my surgery was a Band- Aid. And it was stitches, and the stitches made contact with my skin and the tissue, were the type of stitches that dissolve. So likewise, my doctor who did t he surgery would now have to make — because he provides health care service— an applic ation to the Bermuda Health Council for a certificate of entry and pay a fee, so that he can bring in bandages which makes contact with the skin for a duration, [and] the sutures, which obviously makes contact with the skin. It may sound very odd that I am making these points, but the reality is that we are looking legislation and I suspect that there are a number of doctors that are sitting here listening right now and they are going to ask the same question. Because we do not have regulations, and I will talk about that when we get to the second stage of the amendments, but at this point this is what the legislation says and this is what we are being asked to debate. The other thing is, what about birth control patches and nicotine patches? Those are things that make contact with the skin and provide medication, but they are making contact with the skin. So, now the gynaecologists are going to have to have apply for a certificate for entry and pay a fee so that they can bring in the nicotine patch or the birth control patch. I think there are all kinds of other kinds of medicine that are out there now on the market that you attach it by a patch, that makes contact with the s kin for a long duration. The other question I have, again, with respect to the high risk technology is the issue concerning the needles. So, a doctor has to apply for a certificate of entry and pay a fee to bring in needles, whereas a tattoo artist, who has less regulation, can bring in a whole host of needles to do his tricks of his trade or his art with respect to doing tattoos —and that is not regulated. Also, the issue concerning laser. Now, I personally have had laser surgery and I know that for a number of people that seems to be a less invasive way of actually having treatment now, but from what I was made to understand, from my position that it was having my gallbladder removed through a laser, laparoscopy . . . I think that was what it was called? Something like that. But it is laser, was far less ev asive, far less severe, the downtime and recovery time was far quicker than me being opened up. So now we are also saying that all laser treatment is high risk technology. I am hoping that the Minister will be able to answer these questions, but in particular, direct us as to where this definition of high- risk health technology exists, because I have scurried through the Internet, and particularly WHO, and I have not been able to locate it. Thank you Madam Chairman. The Chairman: Thank you. The Chair recognises the learned Member from constituency 31.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you, Madam Chai rman. Madam Chairman, I found the point of order and clarification by the Attorney General interesting. I hope the Minister will clarify this, because it will make a significant impact on what this Bill is saying. And Hansard needs to record this so that in the …
Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Madam Chairman, I found the point of order and clarification by the Attorney General interesting. I hope the Minister will clarify this, because it will make a significant impact on what this Bill is saying. And Hansard needs to record this so that in the future, if anyone needs to ascertain the intent of this Bill, we can do so. So it is very important. The Attorney General took to his feet, the l egal representative for the Government and clarified what this means. Now, if we look at clause 2, under “high risk health technology,” subsection (a), it says, “penetrates the skin, ” [comma] “tissue and bone.” Now, my reading of that, and I take the Attorney General’s point, I was wondering, Is it conjunctive or is it disjunctive? But, if it is disjunctive, as the Attorney General stated, that means that the instrument in question has to penetrate the skin, t issue and bone. That one instrument (okay?) has to go through your skin, your tissue, and your bone. Okay? Now, that is a serious instrument. Now, if that is what that means, then I will be very surprised if too many doctors have that instr ument. You might need to have it to go and get som ething in the bone, but if we are saying that the only instruments that are caught by this are instruments that penetrate the skin, tissue, and bone, all in one procedure, then we need to be clear on that. Because as I read it, it says instruments which penetrate the skin, instruments which penetrate the tissue, and i nstruments which penetrate the bone —all three. So, I raise this because the Attorney General stood up, so I am expecting his interpretation to be authoritativ e, Madam Chairman. I am asking that Mi nister either to confer or to correct, because it would have a significant impact on this Bill.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 5. Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, in [clause] 4, [subsection] (c) where they are deleting $5,000 and increasing it to $20,000. Why is it such a, what I would call, draconian m easure? This is, in my opinion, …
Thank you, Member. The Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 5.
Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, in [clause] 4, [subsection] (c) where they are deleting $5,000 and increasing it to $20,000. Why is it such a, what I would call, draconian m easure? This is, in my opinion, very unfair, this fine, from $5,000 to $20,000. To me, it is like you are treating criminals.
2426 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly The Chairman: Thank you. The Chair now recognises the learned Member from constituency 36.
Hon. Michael J. Scott: Following on from the Honourable Member from constituency 5, will the Minister explain what the tariff, $5,000 for penalties up to $20,000, represents or reflects? [Is it] an existing problem that has to be stopped or (what is the word?) doctors need to be dissuaded f rom doing it? The sanction is so high that it seeks to be punitive. It is punitive because it is so high and it suggests that there is an existing problem in our clinical community that needs to be stopped by this kind of heavy fining. That is another nuance to the question raised by the Member from [constituency] 5. When the Minister has indicated and pr otested very vigorously that this policy is aimed at bus inesses only, will the Minister confirm that in this country in the clinical landscape of the operation of health care services which contain MRIs and CAT scans, they are operated by doctors? And so, will the Minister both confirm that the policy focus is on business, in the Minister’s view, also means that it is, inescapably, on physicians in the count ry? And when the Minister has indicated that 85 per cent to 90 per cent of physicians have regi stered, is the Minister able to also confirm whether that registration had anything at all to do with whether those registered physicians were also in agreement [with] and supportive of the policy of this Bill? Or were they really registering, as I am made to understand by physicians, because they were asked to register, but they registered in some cases under protest about the amount of information that was being sought? But the primary focus of my question is, is the registration quite distinct from support of the policy of licensing and certifying the importation of high risk technology. And to be absolutely clear, will she confirm that she is not conflating r egistration with support of the Bill? Thanks.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair now recognises the Minister of Economic Development. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Chairman. It may be helpful for Honourable Members to recognise that “high risk health technology ” equipment, (a) penetrates the skin, tissue and bone would primarily refer to ionising radiation, …
Thank you. The Chair now recognises the Minister of Economic Development. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Chairman. It may be helpful for Honourable Members to recognise that “high risk health technology ” equipment, (a) penetrates the skin, tissue and bone would primarily refer to ionising radiation, like a CAT scan or nonionising radiation like an MRI. It could be ultr asound as well. I think some ultrasound does go slightly int o bone, but that certainly penetrates the skin and tissue. So I think that is primarily what that section is catching.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Learned Member from constituency 31.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you, Madam Chai rman. I appreciate the clarification. But if that is the case, then we have “ CT scanner, MRI machine, X -ray machin e, radiation emitting equipment,” so why be redundant if it is not something different? If it is not something different, then why put it …
Thank you, Madam Chai rman. I appreciate the clarification. But if that is the case, then we have “ CT scanner, MRI machine, X -ray machin e, radiation emitting equipment,” so why be redundant if it is not something different? If it is not something different, then why put it in there? If we are talking about CT scanners and the rest, which the Honourable Member just referred to, which is correct, obviously it goes through everything because it sees through everything. If that is what we are talking about, then leave it just as that. That is t he point. The point is doctors have read this, and they are confused as to what this definition means. There is confusion. There is even confusion in the House. We are not sure right now if we are talking about r adiation equipment or if we are talking about, you know, scalpels and knives and everything else. So there is clear uncertainty as to what we are talking about here.
The ChairmanChairmanWe now recognise the Member from [constituency] 36. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thanks, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, concurring with the Honourable Member from [constituency] 31, legislation must be interpreted based on the black letter writing that is contained in the legislation. And, with the greatest of respect, the Minister of …
We now recognise the Member from [constituency] 36. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thanks, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, concurring with the Honourable Member from [constituency] 31, legislation must be interpreted based on the black letter writing that is contained in the legislation. And, with the greatest of respect, the Minister of Economic Development cannot conflate a medical device or medical equipment with CT scanners and MRI machines. Apart from that, the obvious intent of this language, these words, the definition indicates, after the word, “means any medical device or medical equi pment used for the purposes of diagnosis ” which pen etrates the skin. So doctors read it, I am reading it, the Honourable and Learned Member, Mr. Crockwell, is reading it as a medical device, or some medical equipment more like needles and other equipment. It cannot be reread in any other w ay. And the presence of it expressly including now the devices to which the Honourable Dr. Gibbons is saying it refers to, argues against his proposition.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 15.
Mr. Walter H. RobanThank you, Madam Chairman. Perhaps what would be helpful is, because this is where I think we go to the inadequacy of the Minister’s brief in explaining this Bill, perhaps the Mi nister can tell us what it does not include. Does it not include a stethoscope, or the hammer …
Thank you, Madam Chairman. Perhaps what would be helpful is, because this is where I think we go to the inadequacy of the Minister’s brief in explaining this Bill, perhaps the Mi nister can tell us what it does not include. Does it not include a stethoscope, or the hammer that you use to knock your elbow to check your reflexes? Or it does
Bermuda House of Assembly not include what the dentist puts down your mouth to check your teeth? If it does not include those things, tell us, because the definition could potentially include those thin gs. And those are not electronic or high tech items, visually, but they could be encompassed in this sort of definition. As Honourable and Learned Members have said, if it is just really supposed to include the CT scanners, MRIs, X -ray machines, and radiation emi tting equipment and others that come in that clause, then fine.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberTurn your microphone on. [Inaudible interjections ]
Mr. Walter H. RobanI am sorry. Perhaps that is what the Minister should tell us. It may be appropriate to tel l us what it does not include so that we can have clarity and doctors . . . not doctors, because we understand that this Bill does not just include doctors, it …
I am sorry. Perhaps that is what the Minister should tell us. It may be appropriate to tel l us what it does not include so that we can have clarity and doctors . . . not doctors, because we understand that this Bill does not just include doctors, it includes a variety of persons who provide health services in the country, not all our physicians . But tell us what it does not include that might be helpful, other than what has been expressly laid out in the clause. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. We will now hear from the Learned Member from [constituency] 31.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellYes, thank you, Madam Chairman. I am sorry to prolong this because I know the Gallery is full and they are not here for this Bill, Madam Chairman. [Laughter]
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellBut we have to do the job of the people. Madam Chairman, let us be clear. Okay? The definition is divided into different sections, so the def inition talks about medical devices or medical equi pment. And then says the medical devices or equi pment which satisfies the following, which …
But we have to do the job of the people. Madam Chairman, let us be clear. Okay? The definition is divided into different sections, so the def inition talks about medical devices or medical equi pment. And then says the medical devices or equi pment which satisfies the following, which deals with the penetration of ski n, tissue, and bone, et cetera. And then it says, “and includes” . . . so that is separate and distinct. It is separate and distinct. So we can look at this, we can clearly interpret it based on the language, the “and includes” means now we are adding to the medical devices and medical equipment which has been already defined. So, clearly, the equipment and devices are separate and distinct from scanners, MRI machines, and the like. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair recognises the Minister of Economic D evelopment. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would disagree with the Honourable Member’s interpretation on that. It is very clear that the section says “‘high risk health technology’ means any medical device or medical equipment used for …
The Chair recognises the Minister of Economic D evelopment.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I would disagree with the Honourable Member’s interpretation on that. It is very clear that the section says “‘high risk health technology’ means any medical device or medical equipment used for the purposes of diagnosis and treatment of disease or rehabilitation which satisfies any of the following crit eria.” It lists (a) through (d), and goes on to say “ and includes a CT scanner, MRI machine.” It is a belt and braces provision, as far as I read it. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Does anyone else like to speak to clauses 1 through 4? Minister? The Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 21.
Mr. Rolfe CommissiongThank you, Madam Chai rman. Notwithst anding what has just been discussed here again about clause 2 with respect to “high risk health technology”, I want to come back to that no-menclature “high risk health technology.” The Minister did indicate that it is a term whose provenance comes from the …
Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Notwithst anding what has just been discussed here again about clause 2 with respect to “high risk health technology”, I want to come back to that no-menclature “high risk health technology.” The Minister did indicate that it is a term whose provenance comes from the World Health [Organization]. I believe she said that. That was a term that came from World Health [Organization]. I have been made to understand that it is not a term that is regularly used in the medical profession itself. Are we being used as some sort of guinea pig here with respect to this term and the definition of it, and what it is meant to apply to within the body of these reforms? Are there any other major jurisdictions that currently use this nomenclature to apply to things that are viewed as be ing fairly routine within the prov ision of certain health services?
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair now recognises the Learned Member from constituency 36. Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thank you. I continue to struggle with the Economic Mi nister’s “belt and braces” proposition for this reason: If it were belt and braces to refer to a device, medical equipment for the purposes …
Thank you. The Chair now recognises the Learned Member from constituency 36.
Hon. Michael J. Scott: Thank you. I continue to struggle with the Economic Mi nister’s “belt and braces” proposition for this reason: If it were belt and braces to refer to a device, medical equipment for the purposes of diagnosis, and it stopped there, MRIs and CTs are for diagnosis, a lmost exclusively. They are not for treatment of di seases or t he rehabilitation; they are for diagnosis. The language just speaks volumes as to it means what it says, and it says what it means. So the proposed interpretation of the Minister of Economic Development does not persuade people because this 2428 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly language is br oadly encompassing when it specifically refers to the treatment of diseases, which would be more likely to be some of the equipment that typically is used for treatment of diseases —needles and injections, and even the patches that you put on. So the draft er was obviously instructed to co ntemplate these kinds of pieces of equipment, is the suggestion. And if that is the suggestion of the legisl ative language to be used to convey the policy, then we are stuck with it, and that is what we must live with. But let us not misinterpret it as being a reference, belt and braces -wise, to just this diagnostic CT scanner.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair now recognises the Minister of Economic Development. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, the Honourable Member has overlooked in the “and includes” section the area for radiation emitting equipment, which would include a treatment. I think the operative word here, …
Thank you. The Chair now recognises the Minister of Economic Development.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, the Honourable Member has overlooked in the “and includes” section the area for radiation emitting equipment, which would include a treatment. I think the operative word here, after we get the “high risk health technology” and the (a) through (d), is the word “includes.” It is basically sa ying (a) through (d) specify broadly, but just to make sure there is no doubt about it, what we are including is that list which includes CT scanner, MRI machines, X-ray machine, radiation emitting equipment , which could be for cancer treatment, things of that sort, and it goes on after that. So I think it is trying to clarify what it is it is specifically targeting. But the “and i ncludes” basically pulls it into the broader (a) through (d) sections. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. The Chair now recognises the Shadow Mini ster of Finance.
Mr. E. David BurtThank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, the hour is going and as Members have indicated the Gallery is full. We can see the Government is not even on the same side insofar as what side they think this is. They are u nclear as to what it holds. There are …
Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, the hour is going and as Members have indicated the Gallery is full. We can see the Government is not even on the same side insofar as what side they think this is. They are u nclear as to what it holds. There are different definitions coming from different persons, and we are having suggestions from Members of the Government benches of major amendments on the floor, based on suggestions which are coming. May I suggest that it may be a better use of time if the Minister would look to rise and report pr ogress, come back next week to work out these details, so we do not have to be going back and forth with r ed lines and figuring out how we are going to make massive amendments and changes to things to satisfy and come back so we can have something that has been consulted that can earn support. If not, Madam Chairman, we are going to be here for a very long time, and I do not believe that it is that much to wait for five days to make sure that this is tight. Because if not, we are going to be going for amendments after amendments after amendments and it is going to be very long and very tedious. And if amendment s are being suggested from the Government benches on a Government piece of legislation it is clear that som ething is not right. So I am asking if the Minister will stand, rise and report, so we can get these things sorted and then move forward properly.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Would anyone else like to speak to clauses 1 through 4? Minister? Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Madam Chairman, obv iously, it is important for us to get the definition right, and it is important that we have a definition that is not just a Bermuda definition, but something …
Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak to clauses 1 through 4? Minister?
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Madam Chairman, obv iously, it is important for us to get the definition right, and it is important that we have a definition that is not just a Bermuda definition, but something that all of us can believe is the right definition. So I will rise and report progress.
[Desk thumping]
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. We will rise and report progress. House resumed at 7:43 pm [Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair] REPORT OF COMMITTEE BERMUDA HEALTH COUNCIL A MENDMENT ACT 2016
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMembers, it has been moved that we rise and report progress on the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016. Any objection to t hat motion? [Inaudible interjection]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAny objection to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Committee agreed to rise and report progress on the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016 .] The Dep uty Speaker: The next matter on the Order Paper, I believe Order 8 through 23 are going to be …
Any objection to that motion? No objections. Agreed to.
[Gavel]
[Motion carried: The Committee agreed to rise and report progress on the Bermuda Health Council Amendment Act 2016 .]
The Dep uty Speaker: The next matter on the Order Paper, I believe Order 8 through 23 are going to be held over, which means the next Order on the Order
Bermuda House of Assembly Paper is Order number 24, the Second Reading, and it will be a resumption in Committee of the Human Rights Amendment Act 2016, presented by the Opp osition Member, Mr. W. L. Furbert. Member, I recognise . . . if you would move that we would go into Committee?
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As a matter of fact, we were already in Committee , so I will move that we go back to the Commi ttee stage.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much. But we have to do one thing at a time. Thank you. If you would have your seat, then I would request that Susan Jackson, from constit uency 20, [take the Chai r of Committee]. House in Committee at 7:44 pm [Ms. Susan Jackson, Chairman] BILL …
Thank you very much. But we have to do one thing at a time. Thank you. If you would have your seat, then I would request that Susan Jackson, from constit uency 20, [take the Chai r of Committee].
House in Committee at 7:44 pm
[Ms. Susan Jackson, Chairman]
BILL
COMMITTEE ON BILL
HUMAN RIGHTS AMENDMENT ACT 2016 [Resumption of Committee thereon]
The ChairmanChairmanHonourable Members, we are now in Committee of the whole House for further consider ation of the Bill entitled Human Rights Amendment Act 2016 . I call on the Member from constituency 6. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Madam Chairman, it has now been pretty well …
Honourable Members, we are now in Committee of the whole House for further consider ation of the Bill entitled Human Rights Amendment Act 2016 . I call on the Member from constituency 6.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Madam Chairman, it has now been pretty well several months since we actually debated this Bill. I think we should kind of . . . if you would give me time to summarise basically where we were, were we are— [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: You are not the Chairman. If you want to be Chairman, you can go into the Chair, but you are not the Chairman.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: No, no. If the Honourable Member Grant Gibbons —
The ChairmanChairmanWe are in Committee. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: —would keep his mouth quiet, I will . . . but I am talking to you, Madam Chai rman.
The ChairmanChairmanYes. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I saw you agreed with me.
The ChairmanChairmanWe are in Committee. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes, you agree with —
The ChairmanChairmanSo we are just going to carry on. No need . . . we have gone through it all, so we are going to progress — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: But Madam Chairman, I asked for your permission, and you did agree with me. [Inaudible interjection]
The ChairmanChairmanAll I said was we are in Committee— Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes.
The ChairmanChairman—and it is time for us to now consider — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Well, no problem. I can get around that part. I have no problem. [Inaudible interjection]
The ChairmanChairmanOkay. So you want to speak to your amendment? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I will. But I will do my part. Okay?
The ChairmanChairmanThere is no need to summarise or speak in the — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Well, it goes — The Ch airman: —debate again. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: There is no—
The ChairmanChairmanWe are in Committee. You can speak to your — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, I will. I will speak to it. All right? [Crosstalk] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, if t he individuals on both sides of this House would just be a little bit quieter, I …
We are in Committee. You can speak to your — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, I will. I will speak to it. All right?
[Crosstalk]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, if t he individuals on both sides of this House would just be a little bit quieter, I think we can get through this pretty quickly.
2430 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly OPPOSITION AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 2
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: But the amendment that we have put forward said: “WHEREAS it is expedi ent to amend the H uman Rights Act 1981 to preserve the institution of marriage; “Be it enacted by the Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and the House of Assembly of Bermuda, and by the authority of the same, as follows: “This Act may be cited as the Human Rights Amendment Act 2006 [sic]” And I moved [clauses] 1 and 2.
[Inaudible interjections ] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Sorry. What did I say?
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Well, 2016. Sorry . So I move [clauses] 1 and 2. And [clause] 2 says, “Amend section 2 of the Human Rights Act 1981 is amended by inserting i mmediately after clause (2)(a)(iiiA), (2)(a)(iiiB) ‘save and except that the institution of marriage shall be pr eserved and remain as defined by the Matrimonial Causes Act 1974 and Marriage Act 1944, notwit hstanding section (2)(a)( iii) above.’” And to speak to this, Madam Chairman, the reason why . . . and let me first . . . I am aware that the Government has an amendment to this Ac t. And I have no problem with it. I spoke before to the Attorney General and the Attorney General will, I am sure, give out the actual amendment. But let me speak to why we were putting through an amendment, particularly in this section. The amendment to the Human Rights Act 2013 . . . it was the intent of the Government (at that time lead by the Honourable Member Wayne Scott) that marriage should be defined between a male and a female. That was the intent. As a matter of fact, Madam Chairman, the Minister said at the time, 2“there has been much talk and speculation throughout the community that the addition of a protection against discrimination based on sexual orientation is a slippery slope . . .” I remember him saying that during the Stubb’s one. But t hat is another slippery slope. “Which will eventually lead to same- sex marriage.” And this is what the Minister said, “I wish to state . . . that the changes to the Act being debated today have nothing to do with same- sex marriage. . . . 3“To be clear, t his Government considers marriage to be between a man and a woman only. Mr.
2 Official Hansard Report , 14 June 2013, page 1352 3 Ibid., page 1353 Speaker, this Government will not be issuing marriage licenses” (And I see that is what they did yesterday — or today) “to same- sex couples.” The Attorney General at the time, Hono urable Mark Pettingill, said 4“In my view, it is not a valid fear.” (So, at that time, we were trying to put an amendment through) “or concern that someone can take the very significant thing that we are doing here today and sensibly, in law, run off and t ry and apply at the Regi stry to have same sex -marriage, because the first thing that is going happen is that those provisions are going to be looked at and the answer on the face of it will have to be no.”
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberWhat? [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: And it was no. So the argument is that the Shadow Minister . . . and I will get to that point (he is a good friend of mine. We agree to disagree on a few things) . . . is that . …
What?
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: And it was no. So the argument is that the Shadow Minister . . . and I will get to that point (he is a good friend of mine. We agree to disagree on a few things) . . . is that . . . and I am not going to get into the argument of why we think about the European Convention. I am not going to get into all of those individuals . But it was the intent of the Government in 2013. But it was the Chief Justice Kawaley that talked about the [ Bermuda] Bred case, and referred particularly to t he Human Rights Act, saying som ething about superseding that the Ministers themselves, the Cabinet they had put in place, superseded the . . . at that time I think it was Immigration Act to make things happen. So what we had done, Madam Chairman, is open up Pandora’s Box.
[Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: The Honourable Member . . . and he admits it! The Attorney General says, I admit that I opened it up. [Inaudible interjections ]
The ChairmanChairmanOne speaker at a time. Hon. Wayne L. Fur bert: He said, I opened it up. But it was the Government’s intent at that time that marriage shall only be defined as same- sex ma rriage [sic]. As a matter of fact, at that time, I recall (like I said) …
One speaker at a time. Hon. Wayne L. Fur bert: He said, I opened it up. But it was the Government’s intent at that time that marriage shall only be defined as same- sex ma rriage [sic]. As a matter of fact, at that time, I recall (like I said) the Honourable Member Wayne Scott, the Pr emier at the time, the Honourable Member Craig Cannonier, said, We believe that marriage should be defined to be same- sex marriage [sic]. Since then, the Honourable Member Sylvan Richards said that marriage should be defined b e4 Ibid., page 1412
Bermuda House of Assembly tween same- sex marriage [sic], and the other Members—as a matter of fact, Cabinet came back right after I made my motion and said, Matrimonial Causes, we will make the amendment in the Matrimonial Causes Act, and it shall be defined between same- sex . . . that marriage shall be defined between m ale and a female. So Cabinet came back and agreed to the same thing. And so you remember me taking up the debate, and I said I would rise and report progress. So I was hoping that Cabinet at the time, between the time we took it, would come forward and do something. Well, you know, they probably got nervous because there were individuals on that side, rightfully so, who did not support it. They laid a motion for civil unions, got nervous and have not debated it. Then they said, Let’s do a referendum. And the ultimate cost of their referendum was they knew that it would be “no” on the same- sex marriage, but “yes” on civil union.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberAnd they got it wrong. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: And they got it wrong! The leadership fell apart. Now, they sit back . . . and by the way, let me say that the Act is not bin ding. The referendum is not binding. So I have an escape route …
And they got it wrong. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: And they got it wrong! The leadership fell apart. Now, they sit back . . . and by the way, let me say that the Act is not bin ding. The referendum is not binding. So I have an escape route if it is yes or if it is no. Well, I mean, I was surprised. I knew it was going to be “no” for same- sex marriage. I did not expect civil unions to be “no.”
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberI did Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I did not expect it.
The ChairmanChairmanMember, let us stick to the— Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am sticking to it. I am stic king to the definition between male and female. That marriage s hould be defined between male and f emale. That is what I am talking about. So my point is this. They …
Member, let us stick to the—
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am sticking to it. I am stic king to the definition between male and female. That marriage s hould be defined between male and f emale. That is what I am talking about. So my point is this. They were at a quandary. And then they were talking about that the same- sex . . . “no” for same- sex marriage . . . I was very proud. I walked into the polling station on a Thursday —
The ChairmanChairmanExcuse me. The relevance here? You are talking about the referendum — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Yes, I am talking about . . . that is right. I am talking about, I am talking about —
The ChairmanChairmanWe need to get back to— Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am talking about save and except that the institution shall be preserved between male . . . defined as between male and female. That is what I am talking about.
The ChairmanChairmanWell, we want to stick to [clause] (2)(a)(iiiB) save and except that the institution of marriage — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, Madam Chairman, I have asked for some leniency on this point. Right?
The ChairmanChairmanAnd I am saying that we have had a full debate, we are in Committee— Hon. Wayne L. Furbe rt: I am not even—
The ChairmanChairman—and we are looking at this issue. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am not debating this. I am talking about that marriage shall be defined between a male and a female. And I am saying, that at the end of the day, that the — [Crosstalk] [Pause] Hon. Wayne L. …
—and we are looking at this issue. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am not debating this. I am talking about that marriage shall be defined between a male and a female. And I am saying, that at the end of the day, that the — [Crosstalk] [Pause] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: So, Madam Chairman, we are talking about in the clause, “save and except that the institution of marriage shall be preserved” . . . and the point that I am saying is that both sides agree with that. Save and except. But the quandary came about because the lack of leadership tried to put things in place in regard to . . . What? Are you waiting for me to say som ething? I hear your —
The ChairmanChairmanYou need to stick to the clause. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am talking about same- sex marriage. The Clerk: But you need to relate that to the clauses, Member. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am talking about, Madam Chairman, is that the clause talks about save and except that …
You need to stick to the clause.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am talking about same- sex marriage. The Clerk: But you need to relate that to the clauses, Member. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am talking about, Madam Chairman, is that the clause talks about save and except that the institution of marriage shall be defined between . . . be male and female. I am not going to get into a long debate. I am not.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am not going to get into that. But the bottom point is this . . . the Honourable Members on that side do not want to hear it because they know that there were some real failures. I am sure the Honourable Member, Mark Pettingill, will agree. There was a real failure on the whole point of it.
2432 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly The Chairman: Excuse me.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: And Madam Chairman, I expect . . . Madam Chairman, if you just give me a little more time, I will be finished and out of your way. Then we can take a vote. All I am saying is that the people of Bermuda spoke very loud and clear on this particular thing that marriage shall be defined between a male and a f emale. That is what I am talking about. The people spoke. Despite reaching 51 per cent of the numbers that you talked about, the people spoke. And let me say, we have all said that Hamilton Parish was the Bible Belt, they spoke the loudest.
The ChairmanChairmanExcuse me, Member. You are going way off topic. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am not, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanWe have to stick to this. We are in Committee, — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman—
The ChairmanChairmanWe had a general debate. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, I am tal king about —
The ChairmanChairmanYou will have to take your seat if you are not able to stick to the clauses at hand right now. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, I am tal king about the part about that marriage shall be defined between a male and a female. That is what I …
You will have to take your seat if you are not able to stick to the clauses at hand right now.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, I am tal king about the part about that marriage shall be defined between a male and a female. That is what I am tal king about.
[Inaudible interjections and laughter ]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: That is what I am talking about. I have not moved off that.
The ChairmanChairmanExcuse me. There is not anything in clause (2)(a)(iiiB) that talks about that. It talks about— Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Well, you have not read—
The ChairmanChairman—the institution of marriage— Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: —the Matrimonial Causes Act—
The ChairmanChairman—shall be defined by the Matrimonial Causes — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: You have not read it.
The ChairmanChairmanExcuse me, Member. [Inaudible interjections ]
The ChairmanChairmanSit. Sit, please. Would you take your seat? Thank you. Now, we are in Committee and the piece of the legislation, the amendment that we are speaking to is [clause] (2)(a)(iiiB), “save and except that the institution of marriage shall be preserved and remain as defined by the Matrimonial Causes …
Sit. Sit, please. Would you take your seat? Thank you. Now, we are in Committee and the piece of the legislation, the amendment that we are speaking to is [clause] (2)(a)(iiiB), “save and except that the institution of marriage shall be preserved and remain as defined by the Matrimonial Causes Act 1974 and the Marriage Act 1944.” So you need to keep your message to that amendment, and that amendment only.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, that is what I am doing.
The ChairmanChairmanI do not want to hear . . . you do not need to go back into general debate. We are in Com-mittee. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, I am s aying that marriage shall be defined between a male and female. That is what I said. [Inaudible interjections …
The ChairmanChairmanUnless you can tie it into the Matr imonial Causes Act and the Marriage Act — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, if you read the Matrimonial Causes Act, that is what it says. That is what it says! Have you read the Matrimonial Causes Act?
The ChairmanChairmanYes. So then you need to keep your message, then you need to make your message how the Matrimonial Causes Act and the Marria ge Act tie in to the Human Rights Act, and what your whole point is. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, Madam Chairman—
The ChairmanChairmanWe are not going back in general debate and talk about referendums and— Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, I am —
The ChairmanChairmanWe are not going to go there. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: —talking about the Matrim onial Causes Act defines marriage between a male and a female. Are you aware of that? [Inaudible interjection] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am not talking to the Whip. Bermuda House of Assembly The Chairman: …
We are not going to go there. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: —talking about the Matrim onial Causes Act defines marriage between a male and a female. Are you aware of that?
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am not talking to the Whip.
Bermuda House of Assembly The Chairman: So move on, Member.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: That is what I am talking about.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberMove on. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: So I am saying that the pe ople of Bermuda said that they wanted marriage defined that way. That is what I am saying. Nothing wrong with me saying that.
The ChairmanChairmanOkay. So your amendment — [Inaudible interjection]
The ChairmanChairmanAnd so your amendment does what? [Inaudible interjections ] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman— [Inaudible interjections ] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I accept that. I accept that. The Clerk: Excuse me. For the edification of Members, and for the public, I am going to read Standing Order 29(11)(a). “ …
And so your amendment does what? [Inaudible interjections ] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman—
[Inaudible interjections ]
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I accept that. I accept that.
The Clerk: Excuse me. For the edification of Members, and for the public, I am going to read Standing Order 29(11)(a). “ When a Bill has been recommitted, the Committee shall consider the Bill clause by clause; ” (it has been recommitted) “unless the Bill has been recommitted only in respect of some particular part (or parts), in which case the Committee shall consider only the matter so recommitted.” The Member in question is considering the matter, some leeway can be given, but not too much. It should be confined to the two clauses.
Mr. E. David BurtI am pulling up my Standing O rders right now, but, Madam Clerk, we are not dealing with the re- committal. We are just back in the Commi ttee of the House on the original thing. The Bill has not been recommitted. [Crosstalk] The Clerk: Okay. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: …
I am pulling up my Standing O rders right now, but, Madam Clerk, we are not dealing with the re- committal. We are just back in the Commi ttee of the House on the original thing. The Bill has not been recommitted. [Crosstalk]
The Clerk: Okay.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: So, Madam Chairman, I have not diverted at all on my matter. I made it very clear that the Matrimonial Causes Act talks about that . . . do you agree with me now?
The Chair man: Keep going.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: All right. Okay. So all I am saying is that it has been made very loud and clear that the people of Bermuda agree with that clause. They made it very clear despite what some Member may say, two to one the Bermuda peo-ple agree with that clause. So, what I am saying is if we are represent atives of the people then it is very important that we clarify the intent of what the Government was making in 2013. Hence, this is why we have here today the amendment. I am hoping, Madam Chairman, that — and I am not going to read all the numbers. I am sure everybody read the numbers themselves for the return of the Referendum, and I heard when the people spoke—the wishes of the people who you now repr esent, and it was every constituent based on regions, some spoke louder than others, that you follow and, I know it was only 48 per cent of the people at the end of the day, not 50 [per cent] , but if you wanted to give those yeses 10 per cent, I will give you that 10 per cent and it would still be two to one. I made the motion. I have moved this clause here, but I will support and I am aware of the actual amendment by the Government, which kind of clarifies a few things about it, so I will now give way, if need be, Madam Chairman, to the Attorney General to make the necessary motion that he wants.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillPoint of order, with respect. That Honourable Member spoke to the pos ition and I want to reply to that position before an amendment. I was up and asked to be recognised on that. Come on.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberYou have not recognised him. [Inaudible interjections ] 2434 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly Mr. Mark J. Pettingill: You cannot speak to his Bill on the basis that he is going to support an amendment that has not been laid before the House. He …
The ChairmanChairmanAttorney General, you can proceed. GOVERN MENT AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 2 Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Madam Chairman, thank you. Madam Chairman, I am going to keep this extremely short. The Members have had the benefit of the amendment being put in front of them. I am moving the following amendment, …
Attorney General, you can proceed.
GOVERN MENT AMENDMENT TO CLAUSE 2
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Madam Chairman, thank you. Madam Chairman, I am going to keep this extremely short. The Members have had the benefit of the amendment being put in front of them. I am moving the following amendment, that t he Human Rights Amendment Bill 2016 (that is, the Honourable Member’s Bill), be amended as follows: Leave out clause 2 in its entirety and insert: “Amends section 2 “2 In section 2 of the Human Rights Act 1981 , at the end insert — ‘(5) Nothing in this sec tion shall be taken to override the provisions of section 15(c) of the Matr imonial Causes Act 1974 (which pr ovides that a marriage is void unless the parties are respectively male and female.)’”
Madam Chairman, I am moving that amendment in order to clarify what my honourable friend Mr. Furbert is attempting to do here. I believe when he drafted his Act he did not have the benefit of the draf ting staff that I have in my Chambers. The drafting staff, the Chief Parliamentary Counsel , have approved this amendment to his Bill which would then make it clear what his intent is. I hope Members can support that to clarify that Bill. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
POINT OF ORDER
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellPoint of order, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, and I appreci ate the fact that there is some consultation and possibly even collusion between the Government and the Opposition on this Bill. I appreciate that. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Point of order, point of order,
Madam Chairman. Point of order.
The ChairmanChairmanThe At torney General has the floor. POINT OF ORDER [Imputing improper motive ] Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: That Honourable Member is imputing improper motive saying there was collusion. It is cooperation, not collusion.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellOkay, well we will cal l it cooperation, Madam Chairman. But the fact of the matter is — Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Point of order, point of order. Point of order.
The ChairmanChairmanOkay, we are going to— POINT OF ORDER
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you. The point of order is, Madam C hairman, now we have a motion on the floor to be debated when the Honourable Mem-ber’s substantive Bill should have been debated. B efore the motion to amend was put on the floor there should have been opportunity to speak to …
The ChairmanChairmanSo we are in Committee. So I saw the Attorney General stand up . . . how am I supposed to know —
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellWell, Madam Chairman, it was your duty to ask for Members to speak to the Bill!
The ChairmanChairmanYes, and I asked if anyone wanted to speak. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Point of order.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellHold on. The Honourable Member invited the Attorney General, not you, M adam Chairman. The Honourable Member did. [Gavel]
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellHe said “I will now allow the Attorney General to move his motion.” Now, that sounds like collusion to me, but we can call it coo peration. But we have a right to speak to the Bill.
The ChairmanChairmanAll right. As far as I am concerned, we are in Committee, and if anyone wants to speak to the Member’s original [Bill], they should have an opport unity to debate it. When you stood, I did not know — Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Madam Chairman—
The ChairmanChairmanNo, before any amendment is laid, please let Members have an opportunity to speak to the clause, the original clause. Everybody deserves that.
Some Hon. Members Some Hon. MembersYes. Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Madam Chairman, my understanding is when an amendment is on the floor, the amendment is dealt with first. It is voted up or down. The debate on the Bill then continues and all Mem-bers are able to speak. They are able …
Yes.
Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Madam Chairman, my understanding is when an amendment is on the floor, the amendment is dealt with first. It is voted up or down. The debate on the Bill then continues and all Mem-bers are able to speak. They are able first to speak to the amendment, vote it up or down, and then continue the debate on the Bil l.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThe Honourable Member who has charge of this Bill should have then laid the amendment. If that was the Honourable Member’s intent, he lays the amendment. He does not invite the Attorney General then to amend the Bill. If he wants to amend the Bill, fine. We can debate that. …
The Honourable Member who has charge of this Bill should have then laid the amendment. If that was the Honourable Member’s intent, he lays the amendment. He does not invite the Attorney General then to amend the Bill. If he wants to amend the Bill, fine. We can debate that. But the Bill that was tabled in this House, which was led by the Honourable Member, needs to be debated. The Chai rman: I call on the Member from [constit uency] 25.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillThank you. With respect, I totally join with my Learned and Honourable friend, the Independent Member, Shawn Crockwell. That is entirely right. It is totally co llusion —I am not going to use any euphemistic language— it is complete collusion. They met in order to fix the position for the …
Thank you. With respect, I totally join with my Learned and Honourable friend, the Independent Member, Shawn Crockwell. That is entirely right. It is totally co llusion —I am not going to use any euphemistic language— it is complete collusion. They met in order to fix the position for the Honourable Member’s Bill.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Point of order, point of order.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillThey met! You admitted it. They did. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Point of order.
The ChairmanChairmanMember? POINT OF ORDER [Imputing improper motive] Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: The Honourable Member is imputing improper motive.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillNo, I am not, Wayne. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Because w e did not have any collusion in this regard. We have cooperation and we have done this many times on both sides of the House.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Would anyone else like to speak?
The ChairmanChairman[ Member from Constituency] 25, yes?
Mr. Mark J. PettingillI am still standing my objection. I do not accept that point. I say it is collusion. I know full well that they met in order to amend the position of the Honourable Member’s Bill, because they knew that it was not right the way that it was. It is …
I am still standing my objection. I do not accept that point. I say it is collusion. I know full well that they met in order to amend the position of the Honourable Member’s Bill, because they knew that it was not right the way that it was. It is not right now, and I will deal with that in the course of time, but the Honourable Member is en-tirely right with regard to that Honourable Member, Mr. Furbert, has laid this Bill, it is in Committee, and that is what needs to be debated. He rose and spoke on it today and that is where this should go. He cannot i nvite the Attorney General on the other side to then invoke an amendment to fix his Bill.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberNot yet.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillWell maybe . . . and not yet. Exactly. And the Clerk is there to advise you. This is making a mockery of the debate in this House! An absolute mockery! This Government —
The ChairmanChairmanMember! Member! Would anyone else like to speak on the clause? Okay, so here we go. So, Member from constituency 25, would you like to speak?
Mr. Mark J. PettingillOh, happy day. Thank you so much, Madam Chairman. Let me start on this pos ition. A little bit of p oetry, maybe, Madam Chairman, and I ask Members to hear this —and maybe some people will recognise where it is from. Some may think it is Wordsworth. Some may …
Oh, happy day. Thank you so much, Madam Chairman. Let me start on this pos ition. A little bit of p oetry, maybe, Madam Chairman, and I ask Members to hear this —and maybe some people will recognise where it is from. Some may think it is Wordsworth. Some may think that it is Shakespeare. Some may think it is the US Constitution, or Jefferson, or Jac kson. Some may think it is the Bible. “WHEREAS recognition of the inherent dignity and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the World and is in accord with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights . . . ” Let me read it again, “WHEREAS recognition of the inherent dignity and equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family [Member’s e mphasis] is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace i n the World and in the accord with the Univer2436 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly sal Declaration of Human Rights as proclaimed by the United Nations.” Where is that from, Honourable Members?
Some Hon. Members Some Hon. MembersThe Constitution.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillIt is not from the Bermuda Constituti on Act. It is from the Bermuda Human Rights Act 1981. It is the opening phrase of the Bermuda Rights Act.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberShhh.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillI will not shush! It is the opening phrase of the Human Rights Act of Bermuda 1981. Where do we go f rom there? Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Point of order, Madam Chairman.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillOn the Human Rights Act? Okay. POINT OF ORDER Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Chairman, you asked me to stick specifically to the clause in the Committee stage. And you are giving the Honourable Member a lot of —
The ChairmanChairmanHe is talking to the Human Rights Act and that is the Act . . . you were off on referendums — Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: No, I was speaking to clause 2, Madam.
The ChairmanChairmanHe is speaking to the H uman Rights Act. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: To clause 2.
The ChairmanChairmanMember, thank you. You can take your seat. Member from 25, please stay close to the clause that is being debated.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillYou cannot get any closer than the opening paragraph of the Human Rights Act, which is the preamble to paragraph 2 of the Human Rights Act. It umbrellas and embraces from the heart what the Human Rights Act was designed to do. It clearly sets the position that this is …
You cannot get any closer than the opening paragraph of the Human Rights Act, which is the preamble to paragraph 2 of the Human Rights Act. It umbrellas and embraces from the heart what the Human Rights Act was designed to do. It clearly sets the position that this is in the i nterest of the human fami ly. What my honourable friend there and this Attorney General of this Government are endeavouring to do in collusion with other Mem bers in this Government is to obviate those fundamen tal pri nciples of the human family, and I will not be party to it! And before Honourable Members on the other side or Members on this side decide because of the concerns about the votes that they are going to get in election, they better search their conscience. They better reflect on what the law is, because before we start to amend whichever —whether you go by Bill or this amendment here, all of which will get caned in due process, if they go through. But before you do that, I invite Honourable Members to go back and read that opening paragraph, and ask yourself this before you embrace amendment 2, Are you members of the human family? Are you going to shake your head that , I am a member of this part of the human family —the church part? This part of the human family that I have no to lerance for discrimination —other than this? People better think back to the language that is being used here today because to me it is reminiscent of the days of, Oh, we all want to be one people. We want to be together. You can ride on the bus, but you got to ride in the back . You could go to the theatre . . . oh yes, shake your heads. It is different, right? Oh, it is different. Race is different, like bigotry is different if it refers to race. That is not the definition of bigotry. That is not the definition. Clause 2 is attempting to obviate that . But people stood up in this country and fought in relation to the theatre boycott. It is the same language. It is the same thing and some clever Attorney General at the time tried to create some language to soften the blow, to keep the vote where it was . Honourable Members’ parents and grandparents on that side of the House especially, and on this side stood up and said Not good enough! We are human beings and we have to have the same rights as every other human being in the world. And that was the formul ation and the foundation of our Human Rights Act. Inalienable rights of all members of the human family. Stand up on the other side, stand up on this side, stand up in the church —
Mr. Mark J. Pettingill—and tell me if gay people are not members of the human family! If you say they are members of the human family, are they not entitled to every single right of every member of the human family? Do not shame us here today. Your children will remember how you …
—and tell me if gay people are not members of the human family! If you say they are members of the human family, are they not entitled to every single right of every member of the human family? Do not shame us here today. Your children will remember how you voted on th is, how you ducked with some colourful artifice of an amendment to try and be clever. Do not buy into it. Remember what your forefathers —mine and yours (I can say that) —did with regard to human rights. We kind of got there when we said we were going to have human rights and there was the theatre boycott but you still had to sit upstairs or downstairs, you still had to ride the back of the bus. And for cent uries it was religion that embraced that. And we want to come here today . . . this is a human rights issue.
Bermuda House of Assembly Let me tell you something. The top Ten Commandments that I know of do not mention this issue. It does mention adultery in the Ten Commandments. It does mention coveting your neighbour’s wife. It does mention dishonesty. Stand up and say, Hallelujah, if you have not been party to any of those things in this House or anywhere else. Stand up and say Hallelujah, if you have not been party to any of the breaks of those Ten Commandments. But you want to find, digging deeply into some Iron Age philosophy, that marriage can only be b etween a man and a woman. Then love is not your r eligion. I have said it before. If you believe that, then keep it in your church. I will protect your right to only have marriage in the church. I will protect that right for free just like I am protecting the rights of these people for free. So when we come to amend clause 2 . . . I do not know where we are going to bring this debate now, as long as I get to make this speech again— another speech— when the amendment gets pushed, if it does, because right now we are speaking to my good friend’s amendment about marriage being defined. Well, that could not fly because neither of those positions, Madam Chairman, on the original Bill . . . it was just wrong in law because there is no def inition of marriage in the Marriage Act or the Matrimonial Causes Act. And all you are going to do here today, even if you allow the colourful artifice of the amendment that the Attorney General of the Government is putting forward, or if you go with the B ill of the Honourable Member, all you are going to do is make it unlawful for gay people to get divorced. Hallelujah! We should do that with heterosexual people and then school them on why they should stay married and what their vows mean. That is all we are going to do by this amendment, because the one Act does not impact on the other. They are 20 years apart. They are totally different. So it creates, one, a nonsense. If you really think the Crown is ever going to assent to this Act, given what happened in the UK, you are dreaming. We need to think long and hard about today. Marriage a long time ago, Honourable Members, be-came a legal issue. The church might marry you, but the court divorces you. It is contained within the law. We are not arguing religi on, we are arguing law. We are here to pass good law, law in accordance with the provisions as laid out with regard to fundamental h uman rights. And we should not be passing laws that run contrary to that position. If we should do an ything —and I would invi te the Honourable Member to rise again and report progress on this —if we should do anything, let it go through the court. I do know which lawyer is taking it there. Let it go through the court where it is going to end up an yway. It is going to end up in t he court anyway. Trying to circumvent it here just makes a nonsense of the process. You have got the referendum. The Honour-able Premier said he wants to hear from the Human Rights Commission. I know where that is going to go. And the third limb of that is let us hear from the court. Get a legal view of this from the court and then come back and have the debate and then come back and see what laws we are able to pass that will pass muster. But let us not, on a human rights issue, be worried about what votes we are going to get in the Bible belt (with all respect) or Paget West or Devo nshire or wherever else. Let us do the right thing. Let us be on the right side of history. Let us remember our history. Let us remember how our people— and I will put it out —Mem bers on the other side, particularly, your people fought for human rights.
The ChairmanChairmanSpeak to the clauses and speak to the Chair.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillHow your people fought for human rights and you cannot then . . . if you believe those things, h ow can you possibly support an amendment to section 2 of the Human Rights Act if you read that preamble and you believe what is said there and it resonates …
How your people fought for human rights and you cannot then . . . if you believe those things, h ow can you possibly support an amendment to section 2 of the Human Rights Act if you read that preamble and you believe what is said there and it resonates in your heart and you believe in your history about a fight for human rights? You know, I was told earlier today that marriage is not a human rights issue in law. Well, hell it is! (With respect —not to be unparliamentary .) Of course it is . . . in Bermuda law, especially. It is a human rights issue because of what our Act says, that every human being is entitled to the same right, the same service, as every other human being —black, white, red, yellow, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist —every other human being, including every gay human being. Every human being in the human family. And if you start on that basi s, Honourable Members, and say Is it a human issue? and I am of the view that every human being should have the same right to life, liberty, pursuit of justice, freedom, peace, due process of law, and all the services avai lable to every other human being. If you go that far and you tick the box (and that is a rhetorical question) . . . if you go that far, then you cannot cherry pick di scrimination. You cannot say that I am not a bigot, I am not a racist —
Mr. Mark J. Pettingill—if you are going to amend clause 2 and obviate a key essential service to a class of people— gay people. You cannot do that and embrace that. It is not right. History will judge you. The world will judge you. You will be judged if you cannot embrace this …
—if you are going to amend clause 2 and obviate a key essential service to a class of people— gay people. You cannot do that and embrace that. It is not right. History will judge you. The world will judge you. You will be judged if you cannot embrace this fundamental issue of human rights. 2438 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly I fundamentally oppose an amendment Bill to the Human Rights Act. And I love my friend over there; we just disagree fundamentally on this . Love is my religion. I fundamentally oppose it! I fundamentally oppose my Attorney General’s attempt to ameliorate it with fixing it for the Opposition. I invite Members to think on their conscience and do the right thing here today. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Are there any other Members that would like to speak to the original amendment to the Human Rights [Act]? We are going to call on the Learned Member from constituency 31.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you, Madam Chai rman. Madam Chairman, I would like to look at clause 2 of this Human Rights Amendment Act and in doing so I would look at the explanatory memoran-dum. I know that my Honourable and Learned friend, who is more than just my Learned friend in the …
Thank you, Madam Chai rman. Madam Chairman, I would like to look at clause 2 of this Human Rights Amendment Act and in doing so I would look at the explanatory memoran-dum. I know that my Honourable and Learned friend, who is more than just my Learned friend in the legal community , but he is my friend, is very passionate on this. The passion stems from the issue of human rights, Madam Chairman. If you look at the explanatory memorandum, it says, clause 2 clearly lays out that in spite of clause 2 in the Human Rights Act 1981. Now, I want to just f ocus on that. It is saying we have a Bill before the House which says in spite of the Human Rights Act . . . and I think starting from that position as a Parli ament, Madam Chairman, is dangerous because the premise of what we are doing tod ay is to put aside the Human Rights Act. I think, Madam Chairman, that that is extraordinary. And I will appreciate if Honourable Members would show the same respect they r eceived, Madam Chairman. This Parliament’s primary objective, Madam Chairman . . . and I will get to those who oppose this, those who oppose the whole issue of same sex mar-riage. I understand that. I understand the opposition, Madam Chairman. And people have a right to their opposition. But the Parliament’s principal role is to protect people’s human rights. That is what Parli ament is about, Madam Chairman. Now, we have religious freedom in this country, Madam Chairman, which is a right. It is a right that we have not always had across the board. There was a time when certain religions could not practice freely and had to go through times of persecution before they obtained that right. We have the right of expres-sion, Madam Chairman. I am not critical of anyone who wants to advocate. I am not critical of those who have their campaign for No, No vote, Madam Chai rman. I am not critical at all. I am not critical of individuals preaching their belief and I am not critical of individuals seeking to establish this clause outside of this Chamber. My criticism comes when I say to my Parli amentary colleagues that we were not elected just by certain individuals; we are elected Members of this Parliament to serve the entire community. So we have to represent the interests of every religion in this country. We must make sure that no religion in this country is discriminated against. We must represent every race and ethnic representation and we must represent all people irrespective of their sexual orientation. That is why, Madam Chairman, the Human Rights [Act] was amended in the first place. It was amended to prevent discrimination based on sexual orientation, and here we are debating a discriminatory amendment. This amendment is saying that we, as the Parliament, are now going to discriminate against a particular class of people —whether we like it or not. That is what this amendment is proposing. It is counterintuitive to the amendment to the Human Rights Act which said we will not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. And here we are as a Parliament doing exactly that. We are in breach— if we pass this—of the Human Rights Act that we passed. Now, there may have been Members who did not support that amendment. That is fine. But we have to understand as parliamentarians —that is why there is a principle —whether or not we embrace it here, I do not know if it is enshrined in any document, but there is a principle of separation of church and state because we do not live in a theocracy, Madam Chai rman. If we lived in a theocracy then we would legislate religious doctrine. That is what theocracies do. You take your religious belief, you take the instructions — whether it is in the Koran or whether it is in the Bible—and you bring it to Parliament and you legislate based on that. That is a theocracy. So everybody in that community must live by the code. But, Madam Chairman, we have people in our community, and it is their right to not believe in God. Now, I know that is taboo. But people have a right to be atheists. They have a right.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellI am talking about human rights, Madam. People have a right. We are talking about amending a clause that will restrict individuals’ rights. And whether we agree with it or not, that is not the issue. The issue is, as a Parliament, is it our duty to ascertain whether or …
I am talking about human rights, Madam. People have a right. We are talking about amending a clause that will restrict individuals’ rights. And whether we agree with it or not, that is not the issue. The issue is, as a Parliament, is it our duty to ascertain whether or not there is a group within our community that is disadvantaged, and do we address that. That, Madam Chairman, when it is unpopular, requires leadership. Now, I understand that in politics, the sort of overarching game of politics is about popularity,
Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanAll right, let us stick to the clause. Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Shawn G. Crockwell: Well, I am. Because this clause is attempting to fulfil that overarching principle of popularity, not of being a leader and doing what is right for all of the individuals who went to the …
All right, let us stick to the clause.
Bermuda House of Assembly Mr. Shawn G. Crockwell: Well, I am. Because this clause is attempting to fulfil that overarching principle of popularity, not of being a leader and doing what is right for all of the individuals who went to the polls and cast their votes and elected this Parliament to repr esent their interests. We are saying that there are certain members of society that should not have representation in this Chamber. We are saying that there are certain me mbers of society that should not be covered by the H uman Rights Act. That cannot be right, Madam Chai rman. It cannot be right. What we have seen and what this jurisdiction, if we pass this . . . and based on some of the things that have already happened, Madam Chairman, we will look regressive. We will look unfriendly, and we will look [intolerant], Madam Chairman, because we should be about ensuring that everyone, irrespective of race, ethnicity, gender, di sability, and sexual orientation, is cov ered by the H uman Rights Act. So, Madam Chairman, I likewise take to my feet as an attorney and as a parliamentarian and say that this amendment is wrong, Madam Chairman. I invite individual Members in this House who I know are on record, who have gone public in their support of same sex marriage because they believe it is the right thing to do from a human rights perspec-tive . . . they know who they are on the Government benches. Today we will see if you will stand on your principle or if you will let p olitics, Madam Chairman, trump doing the right thing. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Would anyone else like to speak? The Chair now recognises the Member from constituency . . . 21?
Mr. Walton BrownThank you for recognising me, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, today is a difficult day for me to be extolling the virtues of us becoming a more just society, because today is the day in which I am also reflecting on the advocates of same sex marriage and civil unions being …
Thank you for recognising me, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, today is a difficult day for me to be extolling the virtues of us becoming a more just society, because today is the day in which I am also reflecting on the advocates of same sex marriage and civil unions being quite vociferous in their call for justice and for love, yet, many of whom have dismi ssive contempt for the oppression or struggles that exist in other areas of our society. So it is not a good day for me to be extolling such virtues. But I will because as always, Madam Chairman, I act on principle. And I would encourage all other Members of thi s Parliament to act consistently on principles.
The ChairmanChairmanAll right, remember we are going to speak to the clause.
Mr. Walton BrownOh, without question, Madam Chairman. It is all about the clause. We have an opportunity, yet again, to create an en vironment in which there is less discrimination. When the Human Rights Act was amended, I guess three years ago now, I made the point then (and it certainly is …
Oh, without question, Madam Chairman. It is all about the clause. We have an opportunity, yet again, to create an en vironment in which there is less discrimination. When the Human Rights Act was amended, I guess three years ago now, I made the point then (and it certainly is relevant today), that you cannot grant pe ople partial rights. So it is not surprising that we ar e here today with this issue because it is now a matter of great concern in the community. It was the subject of a recent referendum and now we have a court that will make some declaration on these issues very shortly. This amendment that is being propos ed in cooperation or collaboration between my good friend the Honourable Wayne Furbert and the Government side is an amendment that I find offensive. I will not support the amendment. I will not support the amendment. Madam Chairman, the advocates for a more just society as it relates to LGBT rights have had a great opportunity to educate and to mobilise the community in support so that such an amendment would not have been required. But part of the problem in achieving a greater sense of support is preci sely the way some of the more vociferous advocates have argued against such an amendment. I speak about my Honourable and Learned friend, Mr. Pettingill, because as much as love has been the content of his presentation, there was also a lot of contempt for the religious community in this country. If you love, how, at the same time, can you show dismissive contempt for a very large segment in our community? Madam Chairman, you will know. I am not one of those people who attends church on a regular basis. I have issues of —
[Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Walton BrownI go to a lot of funerals and weddings. I have issues with the linkage between church and state because every session we begin with a Christian prayer. So we have a system in which the church and the state are intimately connected.
The ChairmanChairmanAll right. Keep it to the clause.
Mr. Walton BrownMadam Chairman, this is int imately connected to that clause. Now, I listened to the comments about acting on principles, whether you should listen t o what your constituents have to say; whether you should follow your conscience on such a matter. And if you will 2440 8 July 2016 …
Madam Chairman, this is int imately connected to that clause. Now, I listened to the comments about acting on principles, whether you should listen t o what your constituents have to say; whether you should follow your conscience on such a matter. And if you will 2440 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly permit me, Madam Chairman, I will speak to how this issue was addressed within my constituency about civil unions and same sex marriage.
The ChairmanChairmanMay I just remind you that we are in Committee and we are discussing the clause 2 and there is an amendment. So we are not in general debate. We have already had that.
The ChairmanChairmanSo you can speak to the clause.
Mr. Walton BrownI am speaking to this clause about marriage. And on the issue of same sex ma rriage I presented the issue to my constituents at the meeting. I asked each and every last one of them, What is your position on same sex marriage and civil unions? Every single member …
I am speaking to this clause about marriage. And on the issue of same sex ma rriage I presented the issue to my constituents at the meeting. I asked each and every last one of them, What is your position on same sex marriage and civil unions? Every single member said they were against it. Every single member who was present. I responded by saying, I understand your position. I would like for you to listen to my position. I gave my rationale, rooted in part in creating a more just society, rooted in part in that there is no obvious and clear harm to society, and I sought permission from that group to recognise and accept that I had a difference of view on principle on this issue. And every last member in that room, Madam Chairman, accepted and supported my decision, my position, on this issue. So I am here today, Madam Chairman, in support of us creating a more just society. I think that this piece of legislation is retrograde, but it was com-pounded by the Government’s position when we amended the Human Rights legislation in 2013. Many Members on that side said it does not include same sex marriage. I understand the Attorney General at the time said that as well. So that creates part of the problem.
The ChairmanChairmanNo s peaking across the floor, Members.
Mr. Walton BrownI also have reflected on the comment made by the Honourable and Learned Member, Mark Pettingill, that we should allow the court to d ecide this matter. Madam Chairman, we are members of the Legislature. Our political system creates a separation of powers between the Executive, the Legislature, and the …
I also have reflected on the comment made by the Honourable and Learned Member, Mark Pettingill, that we should allow the court to d ecide this matter. Madam Chairman, we are members of the Legislature. Our political system creates a separation of powers between the Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary. They each have separate and respective powers. I do not support the position that mem-bers of the Legislature should actually argue that the Cour t should decide something that as a matter of law should be decided by the Legislature. The Courts are meant to interpret the law. We have the responsibility to pass laws. The Honourable Member, Wayne Furbert, is a good friend of mine. But we have a fundamentally di f-ferent view on these issues. I cannot support any legislation which acts as an inhibitor to the further pr ogression of rights. I know there is a sentiment out in the community which says Oh, these are not human rights. It is a contrived positi on. But, Madam Chai rman, every single society has seen the evolution of human rights over time. Every single community has seen that. What we take for granted today as human rights, certainly were not considered human rights 50 years ago or 100 years ago. So you cannot look at human rights as if it is some static concept.
The ChairmanChairmanWe are going to keep it to the clause, right? This is not a general debate on the Human Rights Act. Bring it in.
Mr. Walton BrownClause 2, which seeks to make an amendment to the Human Rights Act, is a flawed amendment. We are lacking in courage by us not wishing to properly consider it —the issue of same sex marriage and civil unions. If we do not do it, the Courts will do it …
Clause 2, which seeks to make an amendment to the Human Rights Act, is a flawed amendment. We are lacking in courage by us not wishing to properly consider it —the issue of same sex marriage and civil unions. If we do not do it, the Courts will do it anyway. Now how unfortunate would that be? That members of the Legislature . . . we got elected because we told the people we want to run the country collectively, we believe we can provide for laws and a framework for good governance and better governance, yet on this issue we refuse to do it. We are moving in that direction. We cannot simply be guided by public opinion. Now, some will take that out of context, I know. But let me put it in proper context. If you were to take a survey today, Madam Chairman, on the issue of the death penalty, 80 per cent—
The ChairmanChairmanSir, we are going to the clause. Right?
Mr. Walton BrownI know. But, Madam Chairman, just out of . . . obviously, I would always defer to your decisions, but part of proper and fulsome debate is to make relevant comparisons. So all I am doing is for 30 seconds making a very brief comparison.
Mr. Walton BrownVery brief. That 80 per cent would support retention of the death penalty. Who in this Parliament would want to bring back the death penalty because the public want it? Our responsibility is to lead. Our responsibility is to examine issues, debate issues, and decide whether or not we need …
Very brief. That 80 per cent would support retention of the death penalty. Who in this Parliament would want to bring back the death penalty because the public want it? Our responsibility is to lead. Our responsibility is to examine issues, debate issues, and decide whether or not we need to make appropriate amendments to make Bermuda a more just society. Madam Chairman, I am hoping that we wi ll have more Members speak on this issue. I know there is a lot of reticence on this issue. But we are elected to lead. Speak up! Articulate your position. We cannot pass this amendment. It is a retr ograde step. The courts will decide otherwise, in any
Bermuda House of Assembly event. We will have jettisoned our ability and our power to pass laws if we simply allow the courts to do it. We cannot allow the courts to do it because we lack courage. I see many Members having their moments of quiet reflection, Madam Chairman. But in those m oments of quiet reflection I will say to them, think about what kind of a Bermuda do you want to create. What kind of Bermuda do you want to see when it comes to issues of human rights? Human rights are diverse. They are inclusive. We do not make head way by a ttacking others for their positions. But what we can do is try to provide more information, better information, so that Bermuda can move forward in the 21st century. I would encourage the Members not to support this amendment. I would encourage th e Attorney General to reconsider. You are meant to be Attorney General. Attorney Generals are meant to be—
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Point of clarification if the Member will yield.
The ChairmanChairmanWould you like to yield? Thank you. POINT OF CLARIFICATION Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: The way we are going to pr oceed here, I believe, and I have spoken to my Honourable and Learned friend Mr. Pettingill and my Honourable friend Mr. Furbert, is we are going to vote on …
Would you like to yield? Thank you.
POINT OF CLARIFICATION
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: The way we are going to pr oceed here, I believe, and I have spoken to my Honourable and Learned friend Mr. Pettingill and my Honourable friend Mr. Furbert, is we are going to vote on the amendment which fixes the Bill so that in the event that the Bill passes, it will work. And then we will have a vote on the overall Bill which stands or falls as a matter of conscience for, I believe, all Members. So there will be two votes; one vote, just to fix the Bill in case it passes; the other vote on the Bill itself. Does that —
Mr. Walton BrownMadam Chairman, I fully understand what is being contemplated. I am saying, let us stop it at this point. With that, I will take my seat and encourage other Members to have a full debate on such a cri tical issue. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Would anyone else like to speak? The Chair now recognises the Minister of Economic Development. Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, as we are in Committee I am going to be very brief. As the Attorney General has said for us …
Thank you, Member. Would anyone else like to speak? The Chair now recognises the Minister of Economic Development.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, as we are in Committee I am going to be very brief. As the Attorney General has said for us on this side of the House, this is going to be a matter of a vote of conscience, which I think is appropriate under the circumstances. I think Honourable Members to the d egree they have been paying attention will know that I see this very simply as a matter of human rights. I believe all members of the community deserve the same pr otection and rights under the Human Rights Act. I have a great deal of difficulty in amending the Human Rights Act to actually restrict the human rights of individuals, and I cannot therefore in good conscience support the restriction of those human rights for gay Bermudians in the same way that I would not want to restrict it to other members of this community. I believe the original Bill is flawed. I think the Attorney General in good intention is trying to not cr eate a further mess here, so I understand where he is coming from, but I will say just very simply that I cannot support the original Bill, which is flawed, or the Bill as amended. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThe Chair now recognises the Mini ster of Home Affairs. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, the Bill as presented by the Honourable Member from constituency 6, in clause 2, speaks to, under 2(a)( iii)(b), marriage being preserved and remain as defined by the Matrimonial …
The Chair now recognises the Mini ster of Home Affairs.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, the Bill as presented by the Honourable Member from constituency 6, in clause 2, speaks to, under 2(a)( iii)(b), marriage being preserved and remain as defined by the Matrimonial Causes Act 1974 and the Marriage Act 1944. Madam Chairman, I have had a reasonable amount of exposure on taki ng the issue and allowing for an engaged public to discuss this matter, and at no time have I been able to see the Marriage Act of 1944 making any reference to gender. So when the Bill here says that marriage shall be preserved and r emain as defined by the Matrimonial Causes Act and the Marriage Act —
POINT OF CLARIFICATION
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Point of order. Point of order, just a clarification for the Honourable Member. We had already agreed on that in the original debate that that part —and the Honourable Member Mark Pettingill, the Attorney General at the time, pointed out that point. So we were going to remove that anyway, that part of the Marriage Act.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Well, thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, if that was t he intent to remove that, when the Honourable Member stood to resume today he should have said that we want to ensure that we are going to take out this bit so that whatever it is that we are going to be debating is in accordance with what the legislation says. The legisl ation does not make any mention, and the Honourable Member says he agrees, that the Marriage Act of 1944 makes no reference to the gender of the parties 2442 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly to a marriage. I believe it is in that context that we find that we are in —
POINT OF C LARIFICATION Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Point of order, point of clar ification for the Honourable Member. I appreciate what you are saying. The reason why we did not make . . . and we were ready to make the amendment, we had prepared to make the amendment, but because we were going to agree with the amendment made by the Attorney General, we did not have all these amendments hanging around here. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I will accept that. But let me just say that it was not my intention to support the amendment as tabled by the Honourable Member, initially, and I find great difficulty supporting the amendment to the amendment that has been pr oposed by the Attorney General. Because that has not come to the fore, I do not think it is appropriate to speak to that amendment.
The ChairmanChairmanNo, not yet. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: At this point in time.
The ChairmanChairmanNo. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: But let me just say that if we do something in this Honourable House that starts to challenge t he constitutionality of that which we do, we are going to find ourselves up against another major hurdle in which we pass something in this …
No. Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: But let me just say that if we do something in this Honourable House that starts to challenge t he constitutionality of that which we do, we are going to find ourselves up against another major hurdle in which we pass something in this Honourable House that gets challenged, not just through the courts but ultimately through the Privy Council and wher ever else and beyond. So we are going to find ourselves in a quandary because, you know, the Honourable Member who just took his seat from constituency 17, I believe said it almost reflective of a comment that I made in this Honourable House a couple of weeks ago, about courage. If we amend section 2 of the Human Rights Act as is being proposed, then we will find ourselves in a situation of excluding a part of our community that we ought not to exclude if we believe that we should be listening to the pream ble for the Human Rights Act that was articulated by my Honourable Member from constituency 25, the Honourable Member Pettingill. This entire situation is giving us an opportunity to determine whether in fact we as a Parliament are as big as our forefathers who have looked at some very difficult and prejudicial type circumstances and decided to stand up against those prejudices and cr eate law that embraces people, such as those things that led to the Theatre Boycott. While one might be able to say that this does not appear to be ranking pari-passu with that event and those legislative amendments that caused us to have equality, I b elieve that it does. I believe that it does from the point of view that if we insist on saying that one segment of our communit y is worth less than another, then we start feeding into the rhetoric where it is justified to be discriminated against. And if we in this Honourable House are going to stand hand on heart and say we have no problem with creating legislation that enables discrimination, I question again our purpose, Madam Chairman. I believe this amendment that is being pr oposed is dangerous. It is dangerous from the point of being retrograde. It is dangerous from the point of helping to create a unified and a cohesive society and an environment. Madam Chairman, I am perhaps as staunch as the next person when it comes to religious com-mitment. I am not likely to sit and send any negative messages about the efforts of that community, of the religious community, and the Preserve Marriage fight to be able to do something in this regard to protect the positions that they have in the church. I go to church like anybody else. But as I have said, when I see that the God I serve speaks to love and embracing and inclusiveness, I am very hard put to stand and support something that excludes members of our society. I find that very difficult. In addition to which, I just want to say, Madam Chairman, that as a woman of my word, I spoke with members of the Human Rights Commission. And in that conversation, because we had an amendment on the Order Paper which we passed by which sat on the Order Paper as item number 2, I believe it is today . . . (let me see if I can find it) item number 2 today, b ecause I said to them that in the light of events that have occurred fairly recently, it was important to have further engagement on this topic, further discussion, in order to be able to completely articulate and formulate what was deemed to be appropriate from a comm unity-wide perspective. Hav ing made that commitment, I said to them, You can be assured, notwithstanding that that particular amendment that stood on the O rder Paper at item number 2 was put down in my name originally , that I would not take it up. And I did not. I believe that Members here attempted to ask the Honourable Member from constituency 6 whether he would be willing to at least hold off on this amendment and the debate thereof until such time as we have had the opportunity to engage with the members of the Human Rights Com mission. But I believe that there are times when people proceed for whatever the reasons are, whether advised or ill -advised. But I think as one of our Honourable former colleagues indicated, a bull in a hurry never made a calf. I think that this is one of those instances in which we are going to find ourselves completely at odds with Human Rights. We have a case that has been brought to the court . . . or I am sorry, that has been threatened to be
Bermuda House of Assembly brought before the courts. We are going to sit here and sa y, No, let us block the courts in their deliber ations , because we are not comfortable with the things that it is that that case is likely to precipitate. All I say is that as Members in this Honourable House, are we going to do only those things that do not create discomfort for us? Or are we going to look at the entire community and recognise our r esponsibility to them to say that we are going to embrace everybody. We are going to look at how we can ensure that that Preamble of the Human Rights Act means something . . . something serious and som ething that we do not treat as a folly. That Human Rights amendment, when you hear Members who have spoken in the community say how much we love and embrace each other and we will have no ill -will towards others and we will say nothing negative about other people —except, we just do not like them — then I think that we have to start really examining our own honesty as a people. When we start to examine that, I really want to question, I really want to question whether we can actively sit here and make this kind of amendment to the Human Rights Act and then put our heads on our pillows at night and say, I have done a good job. Will our Master, should he take us tonight, say Well done, my good and faithful servant ? Thank you for discriminating against one segment of our community.
[Inaudible interjections]
[Gavel]
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Is that likely to happen, Madam Chairman, because I would not want to go to my Creator thinking that I had failed. Failure, to me, would be failing to determine every aspect of the charge that we have in this House to look out . . . this is looking to what the impact [will be] of removing clause 2 in the amendment and the proposed amendment to the amendment. And these are the challenges that I believe that we have. So, Madam Chairman, if I may be allowed just one quick aside, you will recall probably five or six weeks ago we had a debate about whether or not we should be euthanising dogs and we had such a spi rited debate in thi s Honourable House. A Question P eriod that lasted almost the entire hour for questions, because we wanted to be able to protect the dogs in our community. The question begs today, do we think more of the dogs in our community than we think of our fellow human beings. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Would anyone else like to speak to the issue? Yes, the Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 14.
Mr. Glen SmithYes, good evening, Madam Chai rman. I will take my role from my good friend from constituency 31, and he said stand up and believe in your principles. He is absolutely correct. You know, it was only two years ago in 2013 that we were here debating the Human Rights …
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThat is three years.
Mr. Glen SmithThree years ago (sorry, my math is not that good this evening). And when I looked at the audience back in 2013 it was the rainbow, but this evening we have the church . . . which is fine. It is great. It is great that we have participation and …
Three years ago (sorry, my math is not that good this evening). And when I looked at the audience back in 2013 it was the rainbow, but this evening we have the church . . . which is fine. It is great. It is great that we have participation and that people want to be here. But getting to the clause, I cannot support this clause whatsoever. I do not believe that the Matrim onial clause should be in any Human Rights Amendment Bill at all. To me, we are regressing. That is what my colleagues have said, and it is a step going bac kwards. We are about we should embrace all. And, yes, you know what? At the end of the day, we all went up and voted, and I also have constituents that had a chat with me and said, Well, Mr. Smith, we cannot support you on this. But I said, at the end of the day, I represent everybody. It does not mean if you have a problem with your water, I am not going to come look after it or if you are having a problem with trees and so forth and so forth. At the end of the day— [Inaudible interjections]
Mr. Glen SmithAt the end of the day, we represent everybody and we represent human beings. So, on that, I cannot support this Bill. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Would anyone else like to speak to the original amendment? The Chair now recognises the Minister of Works and Engineering. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. It has taken a while for me to figure out whether or not I was going to …
The ChairmanChairmanWe are speaking to the Bill, not an amendment. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Sorry, yes, to the Bill. As we went through the process of trying to decide on whether we vote as a conscience vote or not, and as I have listened to all of . . . well, …
We are speaking to the Bill, not an amendment. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Sorry, yes, to the Bill. As we went through the process of trying to decide on whether we vote as a conscience vote or not, and as I have listened to all of . . . well, not all of us, but very few of us actually, I am quite disappointed that more 2444 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly people are not getting up to give their opinion based on this Bill. What I do understand, however, is that we decided on having a referendum [regarding what] this Bill speaks to, to have at least an indication of where we should be going. Regardless of where we stand right now and whatever decision that we make at the end of the day, it is a conscience vote. But yet as we discussed and we have listened to folks behind doors, back doors and the likes, concerning the Bill, I guess I am a bit disturbed because it appears as if we want to be a progressive people but yet we do not want to infringe on people’s rights. How progressive can we be while at the sam e ensuring that we do not infringe on people’s rights? We had a referendum to speak to the Bill, to help us and give us an indication on where we should be going. I think it was pretty conclusive on where we should be going.
The ChairmanChairmanMember, take your . . . thank you. Yes?
Mr. Walton BrownJust a point of order. The Honourable Member is misleading the House. As a matter of law, the referendum w as not answered.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Member, you may carry on. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. I take the point, which is why I said it gave us an indication, which is what I said. [Inaudible interjections]
The ChairmanChairmanMembers, there can only be one person speaking. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: It gave us an indication. So what I was looking for, in order for us to be good legi slators I believe that we agreed to, and the Honourable Member that spoke before me, the Honourable Member Pat …
Members, there can only be one person speaking. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: It gave us an indication. So what I was looking for, in order for us to be good legi slators I believe that we agreed to, and the Honourable Member that spoke before me, the Honourable Member Pat Gordon- Pamplin, spoke to the issue that, yo u know, we said that we would allow certain things to happen before we got to this point where we are t oday. That has not happened. I will be clear to this Honourable House of where I stand. I am not for same sex marriage. I will be clear. If you look at a video of what I said back several years ago, I did not believe that now is the time for us to entertain that. The referendum showed me that . . . and it was an indication of where Bermuda was. Not to say that we could not get to that point, or that we would not get to that point, but it gives us an indication of where people are today co ncerning this Bill. I am progressive, and I know that Honourable Members who have also spoken come from a similar background, a Christian background and Christian upbring ing as myself, and have a different opinion. And I am trying to stick to the Bill here, but my concern is that we need to allow the process to take place. We said that there will be consultation. The flesh sometimes always wants to —and I say this to my Hon ourable colleagues —control the environment. So what I would like for us to do as good legislators is to allow the process that we said should take place, let us listen to the Human Rights Council, let us get more word back coming from them, and then we ar e still going to be [having] a conscience vote. We still are! But yet we are preliminarily in the House trying to drive things from both sides of the coin, which I think is unfair to the people of Bermuda. I say that with a backdrop of knowing— all of us know — that the referendum has already given us an indication of where we are.
The ChairmanChairmanMember, you need to stay . . . Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: So, I rest on this here, Honourable colleagues. Yes, we are legislators. We are legislators here to make decisions on behalf of the people. When the people speak, we must listen in order to bring good legislation to …
Member, you need to stay . . . Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: So, I rest on this here, Honourable colleagues. Yes, we are legislators. We are legislators here to make decisions on behalf of the people. When the people speak, we must listen in order to bring good legislation to the table. Honourable Members, I want to bring this to your attention once again. I believe in my heart that we are heading in the wrong direction with how we are proceeding with things. With that in mind, I have already stated my position in where I stand because no one else has stood up and said anything like this. No one else. So I would implore Honourable colleagues from the other side of the f loor to get up and say something. Say something! We are listening. So with that in mind, I will sit down. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Would any other Member like to speak to the Bill . . . clause 2? The floor recognises the Premier. Hon. Michae l H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Chairman. These types of debates always bring out the best in us, and sometimes the worst in us, and ever …
Thank you. Would any other Member like to speak to the Bill . . . clause 2? The floor recognises the Premier.
Hon. Michae l H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Chairman. These types of debates always bring out the best in us, and sometimes the worst in us, and ever ywhere in between. I want to start out by saying that I certainly will respect everybody’s viewpoint in this Honourabl e Chamber. I say that because I think it is important when we have these very emotive debates, and debates where I know Honourable colleagues have thought long and hard about their position —they have listened to many people over and over and over again. I think it is important that we make sure that we
Bermuda House of Assembly respect other people’s views so we can come to the best position possible on these debates. What is clear on this issue is that over time throughout the world, and I am sure throughout Bermuda, positions will change. I think President Obama said very clearly that the sands have shifted in his opinion on that. Now, I have listened to some very impassioned speeches tonight, and I thought that when this came up that we would hear more Members speaking on the deb ate. So I am quite surprised that it seems that we are winding down at the end of this debate and Members have not spoken. And that is fine.
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Ms. Kim N. WilsonPoint of order, Madam Chairman. I think the Premier, albeit indirectly and not intentio nally, is misleading the House. I will remind everyone that we are in Commi ttee and that we spent several hours debating this Bill previously when it was tabled, and the issue with r espect to …
Point of order, Madam Chairman. I think the Premier, albeit indirectly and not intentio nally, is misleading the House. I will remind everyone that we are in Commi ttee and that we spent several hours debating this Bill previously when it was tabled, and the issue with r espect to Committee is the amendment that is on the floor. So we should be voting for this because we have already spent hours, and every person, partic ularly on this side, has spent an inordinate amount of time going through this and addressing it. So the rea lity is we are in Committee right now, so it is mislea ding, Madam Chairman, to suggest that we are not speaking for whatever reason or for some nefarious reason. We have already spoken! We are supposed to be voting right now.
The ChairmanChairmanYes, Premier, if you could just speak to the clause. Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: I am speaking to the clause, very clearly, and other Members should speak to the clause as well. I went to the Honourable Member, Mr. Furbert, this morning when I heard through the Royal G azette …
Yes, Premier, if you could just speak to the clause.
Hon. L. Craig Cannonier: I am speaking to the clause, very clearly, and other Members should speak to the clause as well. I went to the Honourable Member, Mr. Furbert, this morning when I heard through the Royal G azette that he was going to pick up the Bill. The Opposition Whip, as is tradition, normally says what legisl ation they will pick up. And obviously since this was a Private Member’s Bill the Honourable Member did not believe it was appropriate to notify people that he was going to pick it up. Why do I m ention that? Because I went to him this morning, because after the referendum we had, I made it very clear that I thought that the country had had opportunity to get involved in a very important democratic process and we had to consider and take on board w hat people have said—in spite of individual viewpoints that we might have had. One of the things that I did do was to reach out to pretty much everyone who was involved in this issue and I said, Look, let’s sit down. Let’s see where we go from here. I thi nk you will recall, Madam Chai rman, I am getting right to that, in stating my position on this Bill today. I asked the Honourable Member to hold the Bill over to next week, as my colleague, the Honourable Pat Gordon- Pamplin had said, because we had arranged meetings with various people about it, and one of those was with the Human Rights Commission. The Honourable Member said he would consider it, but at the end of the day, after he consi dered it, he did not carry it forward. I was disappointed with that because I think as the Human Rights Commission was appointed and approved by this legislature, and they have very i mportant work to do, it was important that we listen to what they feel about this situation at this period of time. My concern is having arr anged a meeting with the Human Rights Commission next week to bring this Bill forward at this time and to resume a Committee on it was inappropriate because it makes a mockery of any meetings that are arranged. So I cannot support this amendment at this pe riod of time because I b elieve fully in the work that the Human Rights Commi ssion has to do, and I think as politicians we need to give them the opportunity to listen and hear what they have to say and respect the important responsibilities we give them. I have made my position very clear on this i ssue in public a number of times. But also I hear Honourable Members interpolating on that side. I did not do that when they spoke. But I have made it very clear that if you give a commitment to somebody on som ething you are going to follow through on it. I arranged a meeting with the Human Rights Commission and I am not going to support the resumption of this in d ebate at this time to make a mockery on that commi tment. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Member from constituency 6. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Madam Chai rman. The Honourable Premier did approach me this morning. He has not quite told the whole truth because he also told me that he would not vote on this particular motion— [Inaudible int erjection] Hon. Wayne …
The ChairmanChairmanNo talking across the floor. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: The Honourable Member said he would not vote on this motion, and now he is singing a different tune. The Honourable Member said to me he wants to meet with the Human Rights Commission. I said, Well, look, you are the …
No talking across the floor.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: The Honourable Member said he would not vote on this motion, and now he is singing a different tune. The Honourable Member said to me he wants to meet with the Human Rights Commission. I said, Well, look, you are the Premier. Call them up and let 2446 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly us meet this morning. We had all day from 9:00 this morning to 9:00 tonight, and the Premier said let us meet on Monday. Well, I think t here was a larger commission that spoke at the referendum that said we do not want it. I am not going to meet with three or four commissioners when I already know their opinion when we brought the motion in 2013. They made it very clear. So the Honourable Member has already heard from the commission because he met with the commissioner in 2013 when the amendment came forward and when the Matrimonial Causes Act was played down by the Government. We know where they stand. I heard it very loud coming from St. George’s to Hamilton parish, to Smith’s parish, to Devonshire, to Pembroke, to Warwick and all the rest of the parishes. I heard them say loud and clear where they want to stand. Madam Chairman, you let every other Member . . . and I approached you earli er . . . and now you are trying to keep me quiet. I understand where cer-tain people stand.
The ChairmanChairmanI just want you to stay on the topic. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am staying on the topic. We are speaking about Human Rights. Now, Human Rights are not based on the European Convention on Human Rights. It is not same sex marriage. It is not a human right …
I just want you to stay on the topic. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: I am staying on the topic. We are speaking about Human Rights. Now, Human Rights are not based on the European Convention on Human Rights. It is not same sex marriage. It is not a human right under the European Convention. Everybody knows that in this House. So let us not play games. There were two cases —one in Italy and one in France. They lost both cases —that same sex marriage would not be defined between a male and a female. So everyone has the right to choose who they want. I have my belief and my belief is very clear. I have never moved from the day of Stubbs’ Bill when I sat right over there where the Honourable Member Wayne Scott is. I have not changed. So everybody knows my position from Stubbs’ days to where I am right now. All I am saying —and I see the Clerk, I am not sure—
The ChairmanChairmanYes, if you could just — Hon. Wayne L. Furb ert:—yeah —
The ChairmanChairmanOne moment please. I just want to— Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: At the end of the day —
The ChairmanChairmanI just want to—no, it is okay — Member, Member, you will be fine. Just one moment. I just want to remind the Gallery that there will be no gesturing, no speaking out while you are in the audience. I respectfully ask for your indulgence in r emaining quiet during …
I just want to—no, it is okay — Member, Member, you will be fine. Just one moment. I just want to remind the Gallery that there will be no gesturing, no speaking out while you are in the audience. I respectfully ask for your indulgence in r emaining quiet during the debate. Thank you. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: What was interesting, Madam Chairman (thank you), there are more countries on the European Convention that have fortified their constitutions to preserve marriage between a man and a woman . . . 13 states of them, by the way, outside of the 11 who have changed it. Okay? This is because the European Convention totally understands re-ordering society comes with a redefinition of a marriage. I quote from the case of Oliari and Others v . Italy 2015 , “The court observes that marriage has deep roots, social and cultural connotations. As a r esult the court should not impose on the will of the people.” So my point —and the Honourable Learned Member Pettingill, and my Honourable friend Mr. Shawn Crockwell know this. They have the right to go to court and do exactly what they want. Well, we have a right in this Honourable House, and I heard th e former Premier state his case as far as . . . and he was very bold when he was Premier and he is very bold again today. I appreciate his stance. But I am not going to the Human Rights Commission and listen to three people when I just heard 14,000 people tell me no, and made it very clear. You cannot add. Those numbers are a big difference. For those who want . . . and I will step down from my post, and if anybody wants to run against me in Hamilton parish, where I say I will preserve marriage, and if th ey do better . . . as a matter of fact, all of you do the same thing. Let us all step down tomorrow and run. You run based on where you stand against or for it, to preserve same sex marriage, like I would, or you run the other way. Let us see where those other people vote in the constituencies. I can tell you right now it would be a landslide victory, and you know it. Well we are sent here . . . and I understand people have the right for conscience. I actually r espect my Honourable colleagues like I have always done. I have always done that. I always respected my good friend Shawn Crockwell and I always respect my good friend Mark Pettingill. That is not a problem with me. But do not come afterwards and say because Wayne Furbert stands on a different issue that it is like something is wrong. I am standing on what the basis of what the European Convention has said. I stand on what the rights of the people have said. And as far as I am concerned, I am standing on the rights of what Hamilton parish said. I am not moving from that particular issue. I am not moving. You will never get Wayne Furbert to move from that issue. All right? Now, if any one of you want to challenge me in Hamilton parish based on our places . . . I promise you will take so many licks you will go home crying. So let me make it clear. I am not sure where you want to go on this, Madam Chairman, because we can vote on this particular clause. I have
Bermuda House of Assembly said already that I will —and I want to refer to it . . . can I refer to—
The ChairmanChairmanYes, yes , please. Thank you. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: If not, I can make the amendment myself if the—
The ChairmanChairmanMember, if you would like to take your seat, we can defer to the Attorney General. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Madam Chairman, I understand that the way we will proceed is that first we will have a vote on the amendment and then after that, if no one else wants …
Member, if you would like to take your seat, we can defer to the Attorney General.
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Madam Chairman, I understand that the way we will proceed is that first we will have a vote on the amendment and then after that, if no one else wants to speak, we would vote on the Bill itself. So what I am doing now, is I am moving my amendment.
The ChairmanChairmanYes, does everyone have a copy of the amendment to the amendment? All right, it has been moved that the proposed amendment to the clause be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? Oh, I am going to read the amendment first. The Amendment, section 2. “. . . …
Yes, does everyone have a copy of the amendment to the amendment? All right, it has been moved that the proposed amendment to the clause be approved. Is there any objection to that motion? Oh, I am going to read the amendment first. The Amendment, section 2. “. . . section 2 of the Hu man Rights Act 1981” at the end we are going to insert, (5)” nothing in this section shall be taken to override the provisions of section 15(c) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1974 (which provides that a marriage is void unless the parties are respectively m ale and female). Now it has been moved that the proposed amendment to the clause be approved. Is there any objection to that motion?
The ChairmanChairmanYes, Learned Member from [constit uency] 31.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you, Madam Chai rman. I would have thought that Honourable Members would have an opportunity to speak to the amendment that is being proposed before we vote. [Inaudible interjection]
The ChairmanChairmanWe spoke to the Bill. We spoke to the Bill.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellWe spoke to the Bill. We spoke to the Bill. We have been through this. Now the amendment is being proposed. [Inaudible interjections and crosstalk]
The ChairmanChairmanYes, Member. POINT OF CLARIFICATION
Mr. Mark J. PettingillPoint of clarification. My Honourable Learned friend is quite right, as he often is, on these points. We spoke, quite pellucidly, to the Honourable Member Wayne Furbert’s Bill, which is what he, Madam Chairman, quite rightly said. Now if there is an amendment to be tabled, my Honourable Learned friend …
Point of clarification. My Honourable Learned friend is quite right, as he often is, on these points. We spoke, quite pellucidly, to the Honourable Member Wayne Furbert’s Bill, which is what he, Madam Chairman, quite rightly said. Now if there is an amendment to be tabled, my Honourable Learned friend is quite right, you now speak to the issue of what the amendment is. Also, that has to be because of what the problem w as with the Bill. So that is just the logical sequence.
The ChairmanChairmanWould anyone like to speak to the amendment? The floor now recognises the Member from constituency 31.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you, Madam Chai rman, and my comments will be very brief, Madam Chairman. I just find it extraordinary, Madam Chairman, that we have an amendment on the floor from the A ttorney General who advises the Government, who advises the Cabinet, and, in particular, advises the Premier who just …
Thank you, Madam Chai rman, and my comments will be very brief, Madam Chairman. I just find it extraordinary, Madam Chairman, that we have an amendment on the floor from the A ttorney General who advises the Government, who advises the Cabinet, and, in particular, advises the Premier who just spoke that he is not supporting it! This, Madam Chairman, is a mockery. How can we have the Attorney General pr opose an amendment when we have had Ministers and the Premier himself say he is not supporting it?
[Inaudible interjections ]
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellNo, no, no. The Attorney for the Government does not propose an amendment. He can vote a certain way. I am not talking about the vote, Madam Chairman. I am just saying that we are getting mixed messages, Madam Chairman, from the Executive on this issue and on this pr …
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Would anyone else like to speak to the Amendment? Yes, the Member from constituency 25.
Mr. Mark J. PettingillThank you, Madam Chairman, I will be a little more refi ned, perhaps, than I was pr eviously on the issue because now I am speaking to the amendment. 2448 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly I think Honourable Members on the other side need …
Thank you, Madam Chairman, I will be a little more refi ned, perhaps, than I was pr eviously on the issue because now I am speaking to the amendment. 2448 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly I think Honourable Members on the other side need to be clear about this because this is your Bill now, with respect, being hijacked by the Government side, which I do not agree with either. But for what it appears like you might be able to embrace it, but I think that you should totally understand what you are embracing. The fact of the matter is —and bear in mind what I said earlier, and I call anybody to challen ge me on this, all you are doing is banning gay divorce. All you are doing is banning gay divorce! It does not mean you cannot get married . . . and the court will decide that. But that is all you are doing here. So do not think for a second, those of you that are kind of trying to make some amendment to the Human Rights Act, to say that it is obviating same sex marriage. You are not. Because even this amendment by the Honourable Learned Attorney General speaks to the Matrimonial Causes Act. And let me be very pellucid on this point: Neither the Marriage Act nor the Matrimonial Causes Act defines marriage. The Matrimonial Causes Act —in this position, the Attorney General, I understand entirely what he was trying to do. He was taking a legal point that the Bill as proposed by the Honourable Member Wayne Furbert was inherently flawed, as it was, because I was smirking earlier thinking, Well, I will support that because that is not going to go anywhere the way it was drafted, with all respect. So the Attorney General is now attempting to ameliorate it and fix it with this by saying that nothing in this section will be taken to override the provisions of section 15(c) of the Matr imonial Causes Act 1974 which provides that a marriage is void unless the parties ar e respectively male and female. But that is not the Act that marries you. The Act that marries you is the Marriage Act. This is to my point that, you know, the church might marry you but the law divorces you. The Matr imonial Causes Act, Honourable Member s, is about divorce. It is about divorce! And the Matrimonial . . . I see my Honourable Learned friend Mr. Scott smiling because he knows this Act does not impose its elf on the Marriage Act. The Human Rights Act will still impose the p osition legally —believe me, I will prove that in a different place. The Human Rights Act will still impose the position on the Marriage Act because, let us be very clear, it exists. It exists. The Human Rights Act exists that sexual orientation—two words and a comma that says you cannot discriminate for service. The Marriage Act says that a service has to be performed by a public authority. Happy day! How do you think that this changes that? Because I can tell you categorically, it does not. So you can go out and jump up and down if you want to pass this with the amendment or with my Honourable friend, Mr. Furbert’s, amendment. You can jump up and down because all you have done is make gay divorce illegal, conceptually. Good luck with that. And that might be a good thing! Gay people might say, Hallelujah! We want to get married; we do not want to get divorced! So thank you, Parliament , for what you have done. Now just think for a second, because I know you want a Pyrrhic victory here, some of you. Think very carefully for a s econd, because I know you want a Pyrrhic victory, and look at this amendment. Look at your Bill. Look at the Matrimonial Causes Act and understand and appreciate that that Act deals with divorce. So when the gay couple gets to the divorce court, the court is going to say, Oh, your marriage is void. But guess what, your marriage is void because you are already married. And there is nothing right now to stop that happening. Nothing! So normally this works for you, and you are all going to walk away looking very, very silly . . . very silly indeed, when you think that you passed this amendment and that it somehow stopped gay marriage. Think about it. If we are about passing good law, then get good law right. Pull it out right now. I will lend it to Members. I have it right here, both Acts –the Matrimonial Causes Act is right here. It does not deal with anybody getting married in the Matrimonial Causes Act. It only deals with them getting divorced and all the provisions that apply to that. The Acts, by the way, are 20 years apart. The one Act, guess what, does not refer to the other Act, and neither of them define marriage. So, I wish you all the best of luck. If you want to go ahead and support the Bill and support the amendment, because those are the facts, that is the truth, that is the law, and if we go this way we are going to look like a bunch of Muppets in front of the whole world. So if you want to revisit it and put t ogether a new Act on what should be done and all the rest of it, then maybe that is what we should do. But I can assure you, this is not it. That is my legal speech. Thank you.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Would anyone else like to speak? Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: With all due respect, my Ho nourable and Learned Member there, in my view is not correct. No, he is not correct. The Matrimonial Causes Act does not just deal with divorce. That is not correct. He is …
Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak?
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: With all due respect, my Ho nourable and Learned Member there, in my view is not correct. No, he is not correct. The Matrimonial Causes Act does not just deal with divorce. That is not correct. He is quite right when he says there is not a clear definition in the Marriage Act, but what it says in the Matrimonial Causes Act is that any marriage . . . and it sets out conditions. But one of the conditions is any marriage where the parties are not respectively male and female is void . . . void ab initio . You do not need to go to court to get an order. It is just void. It is a nullity, and the law does not support nullity. So, you know, if you wanted to you could get married but it is null . . . it is void ab initio, from the beginning. It does not exist. It means nothing. So I
Bermuda House of Assembly appreciate their fine legal arguments and distinctions, but that is the situation.
The ChairmanChairmanWould anyone else like to speak to the Amendment? The floor recognises the Minister of Educ ation. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Thank you, Madam Chair . I think it is important that I get up and speak on this because I was a person in 2013 that passed a Human …
Would anyone else like to speak to the Amendment? The floor recognises the Minister of Educ ation. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Thank you, Madam Chair . I think it is important that I get up and speak on this because I was a person in 2013 that passed a Human Rights Act, and I think it is important to talk about intent. I am not an attorney. First of all, let me say that I support rights. That is why I passed the Human Rights Act, but I am speaking to the amendment.
The ChairmanChairmanThe amendment. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: This amendment that the A ttorney General has just put in here was actually something that I had intended to put into the original Bill when it came to the House in 2013, but the advice that I was given was that it could …
The amendment. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: This amendment that the A ttorney General has just put in here was actually something that I had intended to put into the original Bill when it came to the House in 2013, but the advice that I was given was that it could not go there. I think it is important to talk about intent because this was my intent, and this Government’s stated intent said by myself, the Minister, and the then Premier at that time. I think it is important to outline that. Now, that does not mean in any way shape or form that I support any discrimination. I think there are rights that we need to make sure that we deal with in this House and get through the legislature so that we do have rights of survivorship and, you know, pen-sions and health insurance, and all of these inherent rights and we put them in place. But the original intent of the Human Rights Act that was passed in 2013 that everyone is using was not intended to do this. So I support this amendment and I think if, you know, we are talk ing about honesty, honesty ou tlines that we recognise what the intent was. I will go a little bit further. I actually think the Chief Justice erred in his —
Mr. Mark J. PettingillIt is not for the Honourable Member, with respect, to discuss or point out a pos ition of erring by the Chief Justice. That is why we have that . . . but here is my point of order. What he is failing to recognise . . . he is …
It is not for the Honourable Member, with respect, to discuss or point out a pos ition of erring by the Chief Justice. That is why we have that . . . but here is my point of order. What he is failing to recognise . . . he is mi sleading. He is misleading the people of this country and the House because he quite rightly says it was 2013. Guess what? All of the body of law —and my Honourable friend Mr. Furbert raised it —developed in those three years in Europe. The UK changed the law in those three years. So the intent of 2013 . . . it is misleading to say —
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: That is not a point of order.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Take your seat. Thank you. Minister, you may continue. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: The reason why I outlined that, and if I stepped on anyone’s toes by making that statement with regard to the judiciary, I would apol ogise. I will take that back. My understanding of the …
Thank you. Take your seat. Thank you. Minister, you may continue.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: The reason why I outlined that, and if I stepped on anyone’s toes by making that statement with regard to the judiciary, I would apol ogise. I will take that back. My understanding of the way this legislature works is that the statements made by the Minister at that time formed part of the body of legislation, and I made it very clear at that point. As a matter of fact, it is because of that reasoning why the Ministry of Ed ucation ended up in court for the last four years —
The ChairmanChairmanPlease stick to the amendment. Hon. R. Wayne Scott:—because of statements that —
The ChairmanChairmanPlease stick to the amendment. Please stick to the amendment. Hon. R. Wayne Scott: So with this amendment, I think that I agree with this. I, in my non- legal opinion, say the Matrimonial Causes Act is the only place in our legislation that def ines what marriage is. I …
Please stick to the amendment. Please stick to the amendment.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: So with this amendment, I think that I agree with this. I, in my non- legal opinion, say the Matrimonial Causes Act is the only place in our legislation that def ines what marriage is. I would actually prefer that we did not do it here. I would have preferred that we made this change in the Bill that my . . . the Matrimonial Causes Act, in the Bill that is on the Order Paper stated as item number 2. And it is unfortunate, I think, that we are here. I would have preferred that we had waited so that we could take that up. But be that as it may, we are here and I have stated the intent and my opi nion many times on the floor of the House. So I could not in good faith v ote against this because it would in fact be dishonest on my part. I think it is important that we just remember what the original intent was, and we are just righting what the original intent was. So I thank my Attorney General for bringing this amendment to the floor and this will have my support.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. Does anyone else want to speak to the amendment? 2450 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly The Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 6. Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Madam Chair, I also will support this amendment. And it is …
Thank you, Member. Does anyone else want to speak to the amendment? 2450 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly The Chair now recognises the Member from constituency 6.
Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Madam Chair, I also will support this amendment. And it is clear that the issue that we should really be talking about is, what was the intent in 2013? If anybody wants to bring any same sex marriage, let them bring it. Then we can have a debate on that one. But the intent was what we are debating that it should not take place. That is the whole issue. My good friend, the Honourable and Learned friend, Kim Wilson, who was a former Attorney General, was the only one who raised that issue way back in 2013 and talked about the supremacy of t he Human Rights Act and what we will do that will make it happen. It is in Hansard. So trust me, I am going to listen to my Ho nourable friend pretty quickly before I listen to . . . and we had some pow -wows with a few other lawyers . . . and yes, I asked another lawyer outside of this Chamber their opinion, and they felt that this was good enough to protect the issue. Now, the Honourable Member can go to court, the Honourable Member Kawarley , whoever it is can make a decision, but we are happy that at the end of the day that we have done our best. That is all that our country, those 14,000 people, asked us to do, to do our best and to do something. But we can do anything besides, as the Pr emier said, let the courts decide. I am not letting the courts dec ide. We have a right as leaders. Now if anybody wants to bring the same sex bill, bring it. We will have a vote on that. I dare anyone to bring that. Probably the only one that would do it is the Honourable Member . . . you know who it is. But it would not go too far. I do not even think Honourable Member Grant Gibbons would pass it. But bring it if you want to, [if you] have the nerve to bring it. As my good friend, Doctor Brown said, either put up or shut up. But the intent of the Bill was to not make i t happen. Let us not play games with the people of Bermuda. We know what it was. Get me started . . .
The ChairmanChairmanAll right. Would anyone else like to speak to the amendment? Okay, the Chair now recognises the Minister of [Social Development] and Sports. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you. I also would like to thank the Attorney General for bringing the amendment. This is not an easy decision for …
All right. Would anyone else like to speak to the amendment? Okay, the Chair now recognises the Minister of [Social Development] and Sports. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: Thank you. I also would like to thank the Attorney General for bringing the amendment. This is not an easy decision for some of us in this Chamber to make. I support the amendment for the reasons outlined by my Honourab le colleague, Wayne Scott, for the fact that we did have a referen-dum, and even though it was 3 per cent shy of the 50 per cent needed to make it a valid referendum, the vote was short by maybe 1,500 votes, or thereabouts. [So even] if every one of those 1,500 votes had voted to legalise same sex marriage and same sex civil u nions, it still would have been lopsided against both. It is logic.
[Inaudible interjection]
The ChairmanChairmanPlease, no talking from the floor. Hon. Sylvan D. Richards, Jr.: You might think it’s faulty , Honourable Member, but it is logic. We were elected by the voters of this country. Each and every one of us sits in this place because a majority —
The ChairmanChairmanWe will only have one person speaking at a time. We cannot hear. Hon. Syl van D. Richards, Jr.: Each and every one of the Honourable Members in this House sits here because in each one of our constituencies a majority voted to put us here. If a majority did …
We will only have one person speaking at a time. We cannot hear.
Hon. Syl van D. Richards, Jr.: Each and every one of the Honourable Members in this House sits here because in each one of our constituencies a majority voted to put us here. If a majority did not vote to put us here, we would not be sitting here. So, I want to put in the Hansard that Sylvan Richards, on 8 July 2016, voted to support the amendment. And I want it noted in the Hansard that I do not support same sex marriage, nor do I support civil unions, because even those who we may try to appease by saying Okay, we will give you civil unions . . . they do not want civil u nions. That is not the last port of call. It is clear whe never you look around this big world that we live in. Same sex marriage is the final station. So let us not kid ourselves. Let us not kid ourselves. We have legal minds in this place who are trained constitutional lawyers. I have no legal exper ience. I was not trained for four years in the UK to be a lawyer. But, guess what? I can read. I can read. And what I have read is that on 9 June of thi s year, the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Chapin and Charpentier v. France , the European Court ruled that Article 8, the right to pr ivacy in family life, when read with Article 12 and Art icle 14, which refer to the right to marry and prohibition of discrimination, says that it is not discriminatory. In layman’s terms, so that everybody understands what that means, the European Court of H uman Rights states therefore a member state (i.e., Bermuda) to preserve marriage between a man and a woman is not discriminatory. The European Court has said, Bermuda, you can gauge the margin of appr eciation of your people in order to make a decision. I believe that the people of Bermuda have spoken clearly on this issue and I represent them . Additionally, let us go back, in the 2015 Oliari and Others v. Italy case, the European Court of H uman Rights reiterated that Article 12 of the Convention does not impose an obligation of the Government to grant a same sex couple access to marriage.
Bermuda House of Assembly I did not say that. The European Court of H uman Rights said that. So with those remarks, I will take my seat. And once again, I can read.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Would any other Members like to speak? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 30.
Ms. Leah K. ScottThank you, Madam Chair, and I will not be long. I do not support same sex marriage; however, I do support good law. And I know that this is a very passionate topic which is something that causes emotions in everybody. What I would lik e to see, if we …
Thank you, Madam Chair, and I will not be long. I do not support same sex marriage; however, I do support good law. And I know that this is a very passionate topic which is something that causes emotions in everybody. What I would lik e to see, if we are going to pass a piece of legislation, is that it is a correct piece of legislation and that it achieves the result that we want. We have got different opinions on it. We have got opposing views on it and what I would like is con-firmat ion that what we are doing will achieve the result that we want because that is the most important thing. We do not want to spend time debating something that is not going to give us the end result.
The ChairmanChairmanThank you, Member. The Chair now recogn ises the Member from constituency 17.
Mr. Walton BrownMadam Chair, because my good friend the Honourable Sylvan Richards has decided to ensure that his comments are now enshrined in Hansard, I would like to make the following point in rel ation to the am endment so that we are clear on what we are doing. What we are …
Madam Chair, because my good friend the Honourable Sylvan Richards has decided to ensure that his comments are now enshrined in Hansard, I would like to make the following point in rel ation to the am endment so that we are clear on what we are doing. What we are debating here tonight is a question of minority rights. I fully understand the role of the European Convention on Human Rights. I know that it has provision for modification based on sizes of jurisdictions and so forth. But what we are talking about here is a question of majority rights and minority rights. Every last person who spoke on the referendum . . . and you have all used flawed logic in explai ning the two to one outcome and so forth. The referendum result was invalid as a matter of law. So if you want to play around and say, Well, we know it was not legally valid, however . . . that is faulty logic. The point, though, is that the argument that is being made asserts that there should be a primacy of the popular will over anything to do with minority rights. That is a precedent that has been articulated by Members in this House who are in favour of this amendment. It is a dangerous precedent to set. It is one thing to say, I simply do not support same sex marriage and here is my rationale. But if you are basing your argument primarily on the notion that the majority will always triumph . . . trumps . . . (trumps? no, that is a bad word to use) . . . that the majority will always superse de the will of the minority and the rights of the minority, then we are setting a dangerous precedent in this country —a very dangerous precedent. So I want that as part of the Hansard as well. We are going down a road which will be pro blematic for us going forward. We need to establish law that is rooted in principles. We need to establish law that is rooted in some concept of basic and fundamental rights. Having the popular will as your mandate is insufficient. The popular will bring back the deat h penalt y. The popular will do a lot of things that will suppress minority rights. And there is a long history of what happens when you consistently and repeatedly suppress minority rights. We have seen evidence of that as of late beyond our shores. And all I am saying is be mindful of what we do. We have a solemn responsibility in this House. We should not be governing purely and simply by what many consider to be just the popular will. The popular will has always to be balanced by consider ations of human rights and principles of good gover nance. Thank you, Madam Chair .
The ChairmanChairmanThank you. Would anyone else like to speak to the amendment? Okay, so I just want to make it clear. There are going to be two votes. The first vote is going to be to vote for the amendment. Once we have voted for the amendment, we are then going …
Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak to the amendment? Okay, so I just want to make it clear. There are going to be two votes. The first vote is going to be to vote for the amendment. Once we have voted for the amendment, we are then going to have an oppor-tunity to vote for the Bill, and the Bill will either be voted on amended, or, if the amendment fails, we will vote on the Bill in its original form. All right? So, right now we are going to prepare ourselves to vote for the amendment. The amendment reads, “That the Human Rights Amendment Bill 2016 be amended as follows:” We are going to leave out clause 2 and insert, “Amend section 2 “In section 2 of the Human Rights Act 1981, at the end insert, ‘Nothing in this section shall be taken to override the provisions of section 15(c) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1974 (which provides that a marriage is void unless the parties are respectively male and f emale).’”
The ChairmanChairmanThe Ayes have it. 2452 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly Some Hon. Members: Names, names.
The ChairmanChairmanWe will take names. We will take names. Members, we ask that you please keep your voices down please. We will have two minutes for all Members to get into their seats. The Chamber will then be secured and we will have names. [Pause for the ringing of the bell] …
We will take names. We will take names. Members, we ask that you please keep your voices down please. We will have two minutes for all Members to get into their seats. The Chamber will then be secured and we will have names.
[Pause for the ringing of the bell] The Clerk: Okay, we are going to vote on the amendment.
DIVISION [Government a mendment to the Human Rights Amendment Act 2016]
Ayes: 21 Nays: 9 Hon. J. J. Atherden Mr. C. W. Brown Hon. K. L. Bascome Mr. S. G. Crockwell Hon. D. V. Burgess Dr. the Hon. E. G. Gibbons Mr. E. D. G. Burt Hon. P. J. Gordon -Pamplin Hon. L. C. Cannonier Mrs. N. S. Outerbridge Mr. R. P. Commissiong Mr. M. J. Pettingill Ms. L. F. Foggo Hon. M. J. Scott Hon. W. L. Furbert Mr. G. C. Smith Hon. D. P. Lister Mr. J. C. Sousa Hon. T. G. Moniz Mr. D. V. S. Rabain Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards Hon. S. D. Richards, Jr. Mr. W. H. Roban Ms. L. K. Scott Hon. R. W. E. Scott Mr. W. L. A. Scott Mr. J. S. Simmons Hon. N. H. C. Simons
Mr. M. A. Weeks
Ms. K. N. Wilson
Absent2 Hon. M. A. R. Bean Hon. Z. J. S. De Silva Abstain: 1 Hon. M. H. Dunkley
The ChairmanChairmanAll right, the Ayes have it with 21. The Nays had 9 and there was one abstention. So the Ayes have it with 21. [Motion c arried by majority on division: The amendment to the Human Rights Amendment Act 2016 passed.]
The ChairmanChairmanNow, with the amendment having been accepted, w e are now going to consider the Bill as amended and we are going to vote on that. All those in favour of the Bill, The Human Rights Amendment Bill [sic] 2016, all those in favour say— [[Inaudible interjections]
The ChairmanChairmanAct —as amended—all those in favour say Aye. Ayes.
The ChairmanChairmanWe will take names. The Clerk: Okay, we are now going to vote on the Human Rights Amendment Act 2016 as amended. DIVISION [Human Rights Amendme nt Act 2016, as amended] Ayes: 20 Nays: 10 Hon. J. J. Atherden Mr. C. W. Brown Hon. K. L. Bascome Mr. S. G. …
We will take names.
The Clerk: Okay, we are now going to vote on the Human Rights Amendment Act 2016 as amended.
DIVISION [Human Rights Amendme nt Act 2016, as amended]
Ayes: 20 Nays: 10 Hon. J. J. Atherden Mr. C. W. Brown Hon. K. L. Bascome Mr. S. G. Crockwell Hon. D. V. Burgess Dr. the Hon. E. G. Gibbons Mr. E. D. G. Burt Hon. P.J. Gordon- Pamplin Hon. L. C. Cannonier Hon. T. G. Moniz Mr. R. P. Commissiong Mrs. N. S. Outerbridge Ms. L. F. Foggo Mr. M. J. Pettingill Hon. W. L. Furbert Hon. M. J. Scott Hon. D. P. Lister Mr. G. C. Smith Mr. D. V. S. Rabain Mr. J. C. Sousa Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards Hon. S. D. Richards, Jr. Mr. W. H. Roban Ms. L. K. S cott Hon. R. W. E. Scott Mr. W. L. A. Scott Mr. J. S. Simmons Hon. N. H. C. Simons
Mr. M. A. Weeks
Ms. K. N. Wilson
Absent2 Hon. M. A. R. Bean Hon. Z. J. S. De Silva Abstention: 1 Hon. M. H. Dunkley
The ChairmanChairmanMembers, the Ayes have it with 20, the Nays 10 and there was one abstention. [Motion c arried by majority on division: The Human Rights Amendment Act 2016, passed as amended.] Bermuda House of Assembly House resumed at 10:01 pm [Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair] REPORT …
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Members. It has been moved that the Bill, which was [item number] 24 on the Order Paper, the Human Rights Amendment Act, be approved as amended. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. I do not believe there are any other Bills on our Order Paper. …
Thank you, Members. It has been moved that the Bill, which was [item number] 24 on the Order Paper, the Human Rights Amendment Act, be approved as amended. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. I do not believe there are any other Bills on our Order Paper. Mr. Burt, are you taking up your motion? Thank you. There is no other business. The Chair recognises the Finance Minister.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richard s: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to move that Standing Order 21 be suspended to enable me to read the following Bill for the third time: Bermuda Monetary Authority (D etermination of Appeals) Act 2016.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAny objections t o that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Standing Order 21 suspended.] BILL THIRD READING BERMUDA MONETARY AUTHORITY (DETERM INATION OF APPEALS) ACT 2016 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Bill do now pass.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerIt has been moved that the Bill do now pass. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of Appeals) Act 2016 was read a third time and passed. ] SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Also, …
It has been moved that the Bill do now pass. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Bermuda Monetary Authority (Determination of Appeals) Act 2016 was read a third time and passed. ]
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Also, Madam Deputy Speaker, I move again that Standing Order 21 be suspended to allow me to read the following Act a third time: Money Service Business Act 2016.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAny objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Standing Order 21 suspended.] BILL THIRD READING MONEY SERVICE BUSINESS ACT 2016 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that the Bill do now pass.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerIt has been moved that the Bill do now pass. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Money Service Business Act 2016 was read a third time and passed. ] SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thirdly, Madam Deputy Speaker, …
It has been moved that the Bill do now pass. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to.
[Gavel]
[Motion carried: The Money Service Business Act 2016 was read a third time and passed. ]
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thirdly, Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that Standing Order 21 be sus-pended to allow me to read the following Bill for the third time: Insurance Amendment Act 2016.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAny objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Standing Order 21 suspended.] BILL 2454 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly THIRD READING INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT 2016 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move that the Bill do now pass.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerIt has been moved that the Bill do now pass. Any object ions to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Insurance Amendment Act 2016 was read a third time and passed. ] SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: And lastly, Madam Deputy Speaker, …
It has been moved that the Bill do now pass. Any object ions to that motion? No objections. Agreed to.
[Gavel]
[Motion carried: Insurance Amendment Act 2016 was read a third time and passed. ]
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: And lastly, Madam Deputy Speaker, I again move that Standing Order 21 be suspended to allow me to read the following Act for the third time by title only: Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act 2016.
[Motion carried: Standing Order 21 suspended.]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAny objections to that motion? No objection. Agreed to. [Gavel] BILL THIRD READING CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2016 Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I move that the Bill do now pass.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerIt has been moved that the Bill do now pass. Any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Customs Tariff Amendment (No. 2) Act 2016 was read a third time and passed. ]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThere are no other Orders on the Order Paper. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 6. You have the floor. SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21 Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that Standing Order 21 be suspended to allow me to read for the third time …
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAre there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: Standing Order 21 suspended.] BILL THIRD READING HUMAN RIGHTS AMENDMENT ACT 2016 Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: The Human Rights Amendment Act 2016. May it now pass.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAre there any objections to that motion? No objections. Agreed to. [Gavel] [Motion carried: The Human Rights Amendment Act 2016 was read a third time and passed. ]
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Members. Are there any other Members who would like to speak? No. The Chair recognises the Premier. ADJOURNMENT Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Madam Deputy Speaker, I move we adjourn to next Wednesday, July 13th.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. It has been moved that we adjourn to the next sitting. But I see two Members who have risen to their feet . The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5. SHELLY BAY BEACH —NOISE ISSUES Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy …
Thank you. It has been moved that we adjourn to the next sitting. But I see two Members who have risen to their feet . The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 5.
SHELLY BAY BEACH —NOISE ISSUES Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, it has been for numerous years that we get complaints in Hamilton Parish about the noise when the Shelly Bay field or beach has been used by groups of people playing music. On
Bermuda House of Assembly numerous occasions, we have informed the police. But that does not solve the problem. On a few occ asions, some of the police are involved in the actual people hav ing their functions. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Summary O ffences Act is very clear. And if I may just read a few lines from that, it says [at section]: “7(1). . .(a) a person commits an offence if — (a) the person unreasonably causes noise which di sturbs or annoys any person in the vicinity, or is likely to disturb or annoy any person in the vicinity, by —(i) . . . (ii) playing or operating, or causing or allowing to be played or operated, any radio, television, music player or other device designed or adapted for the transmission of sound; and (b) the sound in question is heard from a distance exceeding 100 feet from the source of the sound.” Madam Deputy Speaker, we have families and children who stay within 100 feet, outside 100 feet, including some Members of this Chamber. And we get complaints constantly about that. I have stopped [there] numerous times about that. That is one of the pet peeves of the people living in that area, and I am just trying to impress upon the Premier (who is not in the Chamber at this point . . . I am sorry; he is here) that if he can talk to the police commissioner that, when his men are called to the Shelly Bay Beach or the field, that they do what is necessary in accordance with the law so that the people in that area, Hamilton Parish, the Bible Belt, can get the rest that they so rightfully deserve. They are working people. They are children in school, and just like anyone else in any other area. I realise that Bermuda is a small area. But there are other places in Bermuda that the noise is not as bad and the houses are not as close as they are to the Shelly Bay field. So again, I would ask for some assi stance from the Premier to help us out with that problem in Hamilton Parish on the Shelly Bay. And I think even some of the P remier’s constituents use that v icinity. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 31. Mr. S. G. Crockwell, you have the floor. STATEMENT IN R ESPONSE TO HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL’S 5PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I have a few items that I would like to address on the motion to adjourn. I know I have limited time so I will try to get to them all. 5 (Pers onal Statement i n response to Mp Crockwell’s resignation …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I have a few items that I would like to address on the motion to adjourn. I know I have limited time so I will try to get to them all.
5 (Pers onal Statement i n response to Mp Crockwell’s resignation from the OBA , 8 July 2016) The first issue, Madam Deputy Speaker, is in relation to the Personal Explanation that was given this morning by the Learned Attorney General, which I viewed as impugning my integrity, which I do not take lightly, Madam Deputy Speaker. I n fact, it is my view, and I intend to establish that view, that the Learned Attorney General intentionally misled this Parliament this morning. And I would hope, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the Premier would do something about it because it is outrageous. It is outrageous that individuals come to this Honourable House and engage in this type of politics. There was a reason why it was given during Personal Explanations, because that Honourable and Learned Member knew — Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Point of order, M adam Deputy Speaker. Point of order.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe Chair recognises the A ttorney General. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: That Honourable Member is misleading the House. I at no point said anything that was not true this morning. I did not mislead the House.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 31.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Honourable Member misled this Honourable House this morning, and I am going to show how the Honourable Member misled this Honourable House, because the issue is around a letter. The i ssue is not around a conversation, because I know if I have a …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Honourable Member misled this Honourable House this morning, and I am going to show how the Honourable Member misled this Honourable House, because the issue is around a letter. The i ssue is not around a conversation, because I know if I have a conversation with that Honourable and Learned Member, that there may be dif ferent interpr etations. The issue is about a letter that he drafted to me. And in his Personal Explanation, he stated that he never provided a blanket prohibition on the firm which I work for to act for clients against the Government. That was intentionall y misleading this Honourable House. Now, let me go to the letter, Madam Deputy Speaker. And I am not going to expose the client in this matter, so I will skip over that. The letter says . . . I am going to read the entire letter: “The Attorney General’s Chambers (we, our or us) have received your letters dated the 12 th of May 2016 and the 25th of May 2016, which were originally sent to the Commissioner of Police by the Bermuda Police Service.” Let me make something clear, Madam Deputy Speaker, because the Honourable Member also mi s2456 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly led this House when he said that the issue at hand is in relation to matters when I and the Learned Member, Mr. Pettingill, were in Cabinet. That is not true.
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Point of order.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe Chair recognises the A ttorney General. POINT OF ORDER Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: What I said was they touched upon matters which concerned that. That is my view. It may not be his view, but that is my view.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recogni ses the Member from constituency 31.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And I am going to espouse my view, Madam Deputy Speaker. One of the tactical reasons for doing Personal Explanations is that I could not do points of order on the Honourable Member. Now, the point is that I made it abundantly clear in the …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And I am going to espouse my view, Madam Deputy Speaker. One of the tactical reasons for doing Personal Explanations is that I could not do points of order on the Honourable Member. Now, the point is that I made it abundantly clear in the correspondence to the Attorney General and in person talking to the Attorney General that the complaint is specifically around events which occurred in July of 2012. The OBA w as not in Government in July of 2012. There are no complaints in relation to the awarding of the contract, who obtained the contract, or anything in that regard. I have made it abu ndantly clear in writing and in person that the complaint is specifically on events which occurred in July of 2012. So there is no way I can have any information or I was in possession of any information at that time or in a position of conflict at that time. So that is a fact. Okay? And the writ, which will be filed shortly, wil l lay that out. Secondly, the letter continues: “This letter is to inform you that as a result of you acting for [this par-ticular client], there is a potential breach of the Barri ster’s Code of Professional Conduct 1981 (the Code). Section 24A states as f ollows: ‘24A Where a barrister or a member of his staff who has acted on behalf of a client in a matter, irrespective of the nature of the matter, subsequently joins another firm (“the new firm”) which acts or has the opportunity of acting for a party with interests adverse to those of the former client, he or that staff member and the new firm should cease or decline to act in the matter if he or the staff member is by virtue of his former capacity in possession of mat erial information which would not prop erly have b ecome available to him in his new capacity: Provided that the Bar Council may, after ascertaining the views of the former client, exempt a barrister or a member of his staff from the above requirement.’” I have no problem so far, although I do differ with the Attorney General in viewing the Government as a law firm. That is what [section] 24A is about, law firms. So I differ in the fact that he has drawn the conclusion that the Government is a law firm.
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Point of order.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Attorney General. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: The point of order is that the Member is absolutely misleading the House. What I was saying was that the Attorney General is the principal legal advisor to the Government under the Constitution. He …
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Attorney General.
POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: The point of order is that the Member is absolutely misleading the House. What I was saying was that the Attorney General is the principal legal advisor to the Government under the Constitution. He is therefore the Gover nment’s lawyer under the Constitution, and is bound by [section] 24A of the Barrister’s Code of Conduct.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Mem ber from constituency 31.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThank you. And I disagree, Madam Deputy Speaker. But that is not my issue t oday. I had no problem with that. That was a disagreement on the interpretation of [section] 24A of the Barrister’s Code of Conduc t. So then the Attorney General goes on to say, “In this …
Thank you. And I disagree, Madam Deputy Speaker. But that is not my issue t oday. I had no problem with that. That was a disagreement on the interpretation of [section] 24A of the Barrister’s Code of Conduc t. So then the Attorney General goes on to say, “In this instance, Mr. Mark Pettingill, MP JP, was the Attorney General and legal advisor to the Government of Bermuda and its various departments, including the BPS [Bermuda Police Service], Government, at the time that [the client] contract was reviewed and ap-proved by the then- Cabinet on at least two occasions in 2013.” And again, Madam Deputy Speaker, our complaint has nothing to do with what occurred in 2013. This is the paragraph, Madam Deputy Speaker , the two paragraphs which demonstrate that the Honourable and Learned Attorney General misled the House. It goes on to say, “Section 24A of the Code makes it clear that if the legal advisor of the Gover nment sets up a new firm, neither the firm nor any p erson working for the firm should commence any action against the Gover nment on behalf of the client.” And then he says this: “As a result of the above, I invite you, your firm, and anyone working for your firm to remove yourselves from this matter and to avoid representing your client or any other person against the Government in future so that any potential conflict of interest and any potential breaches of the Code can be avoided.” Now, how am I supposed to interpret that paragraph? “Or any other pers on against the Go vB ermuda House of Assembly ernment in future.” That is a prohibition of this firm’s representing any client in the future against the Go vernment. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Point of order. Point of order. Point of order.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerPoint of order. POINT OF OR DER Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: There is no prohibition there. The word at the beginning, as I said this morning, was invite —invite. That is not a command. It is not a prohibition. It is not an order of any type. It is an …
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 31.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellAnd we can parse words, Honourable and Learned Attorney General. But the Honourable and Learned Attorney General —whether you want to say prohibit, invite, suggest —it was his position that neither I nor my honourable and learned colleague can represent any cl ient against the Government in the future, which …
And we can parse words, Honourable and Learned Attorney General. But the Honourable and Learned Attorney General —whether you want to say prohibit, invite, suggest —it was his position that neither I nor my honourable and learned colleague can represent any cl ient against the Government in the future, which is, in my view, economic intimidation, Madam Deputy Speaker. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Point of order. Point of order. Point of order.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe Chair recognises the A ttorney General. POINT OF ORDER Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: That was not my view. I was inviting him. It sounds like he misunderstood me. It was an invitation to avoid the perception of difficulties. He obviously does not agree and does not want to take …
The Chair recognises the A ttorney General. POINT OF ORDER Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: That was not my view. I was inviting him. It sounds like he misunderstood me. It was an invitation to avoid the perception of difficulties. He obviously does not agree and does not want to take that advice; he is entitled to do it. I have no power to prohibit him. He knows that. The people who govern it, as he has already read out, are the Bar Council, not me. It was an invitation to avoid the perception of a conflict of interest. He does not want to take it? Do not take it.
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellMadam Deputy Speaker, the Honourable Member had his chance to give his Personal Explanation. He i s not going to keep interrupting me tonight. Okay? [ Inaudible interjection] Mr. Shawn G. Crockwell: The reality . . . I am reading verbatim, okay? The Honourable Member said today what he invited …
Madam Deputy Speaker, the Honourable Member had his chance to give his Personal Explanation. He i s not going to keep interrupting me tonight. Okay? [ Inaudible interjection] Mr. Shawn G. Crockwell: The reality . . . I am reading verbatim, okay? The Honourable Member said today what he invited me to do was not a blanket prescription. It was! He was inviting me not to act for any client against the Government in the future! [ Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellHe was still inviting me not to act for any clients against the Government in the future, which would drastically reduce and restric t my practice, which is outrageous. Now, I can see, I can see, because I see consultation. I can see if the Honourable Member was saying that, …
He was still inviting me not to act for any clients against the Government in the future, which would drastically reduce and restric t my practice, which is outrageous. Now, I can see, I can see, because I see consultation. I can see if the Honourable Member was saying that, If you had a conflict and we would eval uate each case based on whether there was a conflict, then I would say, I think you have a conflict here. I would accept that. But you cannot invite me, just bla nket-ly, not to act for any other person against the Government in the future. [ Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellWell, he can. He can. And I am not surprised that he did. There is no consideration about my business. There is no consideration about my ability to be able to earn a living in my profession in my country. That does not concern the Attorney General. He is not …
Well, he can. He can. And I am not surprised that he did. There is no consideration about my business. There is no consideration about my ability to be able to earn a living in my profession in my country. That does not concern the Attorney General. He is not worried about whether or not I can pay my bills or put my children through university. Why not?, he said. Why not invite you not to be able to freely practice your profession, as he has had the opportunity to do throughout his entire career? Why not? Because that is how that Honourable and Learned Member thinks. It is okay to invite you to basically be unable to be successful in your career. Well, I refute that. That is the first thing. And I will, Madam Deputy Speaker, ensure as I go forward that at every opportunity I have, [I will] clarify this ma tter. Because I felt that this morning, not surprisingly, in terms of an ambush by Honourable Members on that side, it was, in my view, unacceptable. Because that Honourable Member had an opportunity when I gave my speech on the motion to adjourn to do a point of order. [On] the day that I gave it, there was silence. There was silence. HAMILTON PRINCESS AND ST. GEORGE'S HOTEL DESIGNATED CASINO GAMING SITES
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellMy second matter I would like to discuss, very quickly, is that we saw in the Royal Gazette on, I believe it was the 28th of June, the fact that the Hamilton Princess and the St. George's Hotel projects were approved as designated sites. I will actually read the first …
My second matter I would like to discuss, very quickly, is that we saw in the Royal Gazette on, I believe it was the 28th of June, the fact that the Hamilton Princess and the St. George's Hotel projects were approved as designated sites. I will actually read the first paragraph. It says, “The Hamilton Princess and the St. George's Hotel project 2458 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report B ermuda House of Assemb ly will be eligible to apply for casino licences after being named designated sites. “Both locations were recommended for desi gnation by the Bermuda Casino Gaming Commission and approved by Senator Michael Fahy, the Minister for Tourism, Transport and Municipalities.” [I am] very pleased, Madam Deputy Speaker, that we see things happening there. I contacted the Chairman of the Gaming Commission some time ago and flagged to him that, in the Casino Gaming Act, at section 4, subject to section 4A, it states that the Mi nister, acting on the advice of the Commission, may, by order published in the Gazette , (a) designate for such period as may be appropriate the specified period, a parcel of land or an existing tourist resort as a site for an integrated resort; “(b) extend any period under paragraph (a) for such further period as may be spec ified in the order.” [And] “(2) An order made by the Minister under subsection (1) is subject to the affirm ation resolution procedure.” Okay. So I raise that because it appears as if people think that these sites have been designated. I flagged it, that it has to come to Parliament through an affirmative resolution and be approved. Now, today is the 8 th. I understand we are ri sing on the 15th. We have two more sessions. I have not seen any affirmation resolutions to approve these designated sites. Section 4 requires it. I do not know what has happened. But I am hoping that the Go vernment will realise that there is another step as it r elates to this desi gnation process. CRIME—ADDRESSING INCREASE IN SERIOUS CRIME
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellMy final point, Madam Deputy Speaker, is the concern I have with the gro wing crisis in this country around gun violence and the loss of life of our young men. I am sure we can go to Hansard and find a myriad of speeches on this issue, and I …
My final point, Madam Deputy Speaker, is the concern I have with the gro wing crisis in this country around gun violence and the loss of life of our young men. I am sure we can go to Hansard and find a myriad of speeches on this issue, and I will probably just be repeating what has already been said. I raise this because of recent events, and I believe that there have been some who have said we have become anesthetised to this. I remember a time if you had one gun murder in a year, it was shocking and astounding. And now we have two people shot in one night, and there is barely a blink. But I attended the funeral service of my cousin, Fiqre Crockwell, on Sunday. And it was an extremely, as you can imagine, Madam Deputy Speaker . . . I have a very large family. I could tell you the funeral was at St. James Church. And the family filled the whole church. I have not seen . . . the people literally flowed out of the church and went right to the road. There were that many people there. I estimate that there were between 600 and 1,000 people there to see off a young man, gunned down in his prime, a young man who represented this country at the hig hest level in cricket, a young man whom I have not been able to find anyone, anyone . . . and I do not know the circumstances of the situation. People I have talked to said that he was just involved with the wrong people. Whatever the case may be, we always say that about our loved ones in circumstances like this. But I can tell you I have not found anyone who said a bad thing about Fiqre. The entire St. David’s Cricket Club was there. I have never seen this before. It was a long funeral, three and a half hours. They took the rostrum, and every team member gave a tribute. And many of them could not get through it. They were broken men, put-ting to rest their fallen comrade. The entire Bailey’s Bay Cricket Club was there. And why is that signif icant? Anyone who knows cricket knows that St. David’s and Bailey’s Bay are arch rivals. The entire Bailey’s Bay Cricket Club, and they took the stage. And I would say the Honourable Member from St. David’s was there. They took the entire stage, broken. And unbeknownst to me, he was also a footballer. And his mother, my aunt, was born in Somerset. They were born in Somerset. And for some reason, and even her children do not know why, at a time when it was not popular to move to St. David’s, Madam Deputy Speaker, for some reason many years ago, she took all of her children and they moved to St. David’s. And that is why, because all Crockwells are related. And that is another story, but all Crockwells are related in Bermuda. You would not find Crockwells anywhere else in the world, because my great - grandfather made that name up when he came to Bermuda. He was not a Crockwell when he came here. He was a Hughes from Barbados. And he was fleeing something, and he came to Bermuda. And, you know, legend has it he was an indentured servant and he came to Bermuda in the 1800s and changed his name to Crockwell. And so, if you find a Crockwell anywhere else in the world, they came from Bermuda, or their roots are in Bermuda. But at any event, that is why all Crockwells are related. And in this case, we took the Bibl e lite rally, Be fruitful and multiply, because when my gran dfather died in 1988, he had 86 grandchildren and great -grandchildren—86. That is why they can fill the whole church, Madam Deputy Speaker. But she moved to St. David’s, so we have East End Croc kwells and we have West End Crockwells. [ Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellAnd of course, yes, I will not forget. They would not let me forget that. But the point, Madam Deputy Speaker, is that here was this young man. And you had all of thes e mourners representing the entire Island, from St. David’s to Somerset. And I have to tell …
And of course, yes, I will not forget. They would not let me forget that. But the point, Madam Deputy Speaker, is that here was this young man. And you had all of thes e mourners representing the entire Island, from St. David’s to Somerset. And I have to tell you, I was di sappointed that there was no representation from this Cabinet at that service. I was disappointed. And I have expressed that disappointment to the Prem ier. I
Ber muda House of Assembly was disappointed that the National Security Minister was not there. We have a crisis in this country around this issue, and as a Government, we need to show those who are affected by this that we care! And you do not do that by writing letters or by sending flowers. We have to do that by showing up and being seen and touching the flesh. So just a word of advice to the Government. Those types of things touch the black community, Madam Deputy Speaker. It makes a di fference, Madam Deputy Speaker. And i f we are serious . . . because I was also disappointed that, on a day when you would expect tensions to run high, I do not know what plan was in place, but anyone [could] see something [might] happen that night. And it did. So, I just do not know how serio usly we are taking this. But if we do not, Madam Deputy Speaker, have a real strategy to address it, I have been saying this for years, this issue can really have a negative impact on our jurisdiction. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Th e Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Attorney General. CLARIFICATION RE: HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL’S 6PERSONAL EXPLANATION Ho n. Trevor G. Moniz: Thank you. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I just rise to my feet to clear a few, in my view, misunder standings that the Honourable and Learned Member, Mr. Crockwell has. Last week when he made his very angry and emotional speech, I did not really wish to— Mr . Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Th e Deputy Speaker: Yes, your point of order. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Mr . Shawn G. Crockwell: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. Last week, I was not angry. Th e Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises — Mr . Shawn G. Crockwell: I just told the truth. Ho n. Trevor G. Moniz: Sorry, but he sounded extraordinarily angry to me. So that is subjective, but there you go. So I did not want to jump up and keep interrupting him because he gets quite —you know, like anybody would— annoyed if you jump up and i n6 (Personal Statement i n response to Mp Crockwell’s resignation from the OBA, 8 July 2016) terrupt him . So I said, No, let me think about this and think about my response. I did not give a Personal Explanation because I was afraid of that Honourable and Learned Member; I have no fear of him at all. And I have no— Mr . Shawn G. Crockwell: Point of order. Point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Th e Deputy Speaker: Thank you. Your point of order. POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Mr . Shawn G. Crockwell: The Honourable Member is misleading the House. I have never stated, opined, suggested, that the Honourable and Learned Attorney General is afraid of me. Th e Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Honourable Member. Ho n. Trevor G. Moniz: I never said he did. I never said he did. Th e Deputy Speaker: The Chair recognises the A ttorney General. Ho n. Trevor G. Moniz: I never said he did. I just pointed out that I had no fear. So I was not avoiding questions. Mr . Shawn G. Crockwell: And I am not afraid of you. Ho n. Trevor G. Moniz: I would never suggest you were. I would never suggest you were afraid of me. I am not a person to be afraid of. I just thought the Personal Explanation was the appropriate place to do what I did. That was the simple fact of the matter. That was the advice given to me. That was the advice I accepted. So I acted accordingly. It did not stop the Honourable Member from responding, which he did during the course of the day and this evening. And we are here to address it. So there is no problem there. I am sympathetic to his issue. When you are a Cabinet Minister and you step down, when you are Attorney General and you step down, you are going to have challenges when you try and deal with Gover nment. There are going to be perceptions about what you are doing. If I were to step down from Attorney General tomorrow, and suddenly some big person dealing with Government is my client, people are going to say, Oh, well, there is some sort of sweetheart deal going on here. So you have got to be very car eful. There are red flags. And I certainly act from an abundance of caution. It is not a nice position to be in; it is just the fact. It is just the truth. You are in a diff icult position. You have to govern yourself accordingly. 2460 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly All I can do is advise. I do not control these things. That is why the Honourable and Learned Member was wrong when he spoke of prohibition. I have no power to prohibit him from acting [for] clients. All that I am able to do, if I see that there is an issue of a conflict, is to raise that issue. Now, certainly in poor taste, I can raise it in the court. But the usual way to raise it is with the B ar Council under [section] 24A. That is how you do it. I have had it taken against me; I have taken it against other people. The people who adjudicate are the Bar Council. They have the power to adjudicate and make a ruling. They also have the power to giv e a waiver; it says that. He read it out. I read it out. There is that power. All I can do is raise a flag and say, I have a problem here. That is all I can do. And that was raised in my Chambers by the counsellor who was dealing with the matter. That counsel came to me and said, AG, I see a problem. He drafted a letter. I reviewed it, and I signed it, and subsequently reached out to both Mr. Pettingill and Mr. Crockwell to discuss the situa-tion. Counsel in Chambers thought that a contract which came up in Cabinet in 2013, touched upon the original position that they were acting for the client. I accept that that H onourable and Learned Member does not agree. But that is what counsel in Chambers said. Out of an abundance of caution, I raised the matter, as I thought it was proper to do, at the earliest opportunity, before anyone would be embarrassed. I did not want to be accused of ambushing the counsel in court by jumping up in court and saying it without warning. I wanted to raise the flag at the earliest possible opportunity. That is why I used the very soft word in there like “ invite .” That is all I was doing. And that letter was the beginning of a process; it was not the end. Subsequently, we had a meeting. The Premier and I had a meeting with the Honourable and Learned Member, Mr. Pettingill, and the Honourable and Learned Member, Mr. Crockwell. And we found a way forward, or so we thought. And su bsequent to that, Mr. Crockwell said, Well, I want you to give me a letter saying A, B and C. I delivered t hat letter to Mr. Crockwell. I had promised it by five o’clock in the evening, and I delivered it at five minutes past five last Friday. And he said to me, You’re five mi nutes late, jokingly, and laughed. And he responded to that letter. I got a letter bac k from him. And we thought we had found a way forward. So the letter he read was not the end of a process; it was the beginning of a process, and we thought we had moved forward. Clearly, clearly, I was under the wrong impression, which is why I was total ly surprised last Friday when the Honourable Member said what he said. I was taken off guard. I said, Well, let me go home and think about this. I do not know where he is coming from. We discussed these issues. And I had even suggested to them, Let’s take the matter to the Bar Council and let them adjudicate. You know, their idea was, No, we don’t want to do that. Or at least they did not accept the suggestion. And they said, We’re getting a QC’s opinion. And we will deliver that QC’s opinion to you. I said, Okay. Well, go ahead and do that. I am still waiting. I have not received it. Hopefully, we will receive it and move forward and resolve the matter. So, you know, I want to assure the Honourable and Learned Member, I want to assure the House, I want to assure the public, at no time at all was there any agenda. At no time was there any ill feeling. At no time was there any attempt to destroy the Honourable and Learned Member’s practice. I have no idea what his practice is made up of. For all I know, his cases against the Government are 1/100 th of 1 per cent of his practice. I do not know. I am not privy to his business. But, you know, when members of my Chambers raise red flags, I have to proceed and draw attention to them, no matter who it is. And if I step down, the next Attorney General would do the same for me. You know, that is one of the dangers of the job. That is just the way it is. So that is all I can say. I do not know if I can do any more than that.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe point of order is? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellThe Honourable Member is misleading this House. I know of no other former A ttorney General who has ever received a letter like that. And if there is a former Attorney General, we have a few in this House, who has received a letter from the Attorney General when they …
The Honourable Member is misleading this House. I know of no other former A ttorney General who has ever received a letter like that. And if there is a former Attorney General, we have a few in this House, who has received a letter from the Attorney General when they attempted to act against the Government, please let me see it.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the At torney General. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Madam Deputy Speaker, I cannot speak for other Attorneys General. I cannot speak —
Mr. Shawn G. CrockwellYou said it was common. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: No, I did not say it was common. I said that if I were to step down tomorrow, and if I were to take a client, I would expect the next Attorney General to raise the same flag with me. That …
You said it was common. Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: No, I did not say it was common. I said that if I were to step down tomorrow, and if I were to take a client, I would expect the next Attorney General to raise the same flag with me. That is what I said.
[Inaudible interjection]
Bermuda House of Assembly Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: I would expect that! I do not know if this is the first time it ha s happened. But, you know . . . look. Members have to understand that I was a member of the Bar Council for 11 years. I was President of the Bar for two years. I was perfectly used to dealing with disciplinary complaints on a daily basis. It was not an unusual thing for me. And the Bar were adjudicating on these things on a daily or weekly basis. It is not a big deal within the Bar, you know. The Honourable Member makes out, Oh, we had a disagreement about this. My impression is he is sa ying it is the end of the world. It is not. You have a di sagreement. There is a process to resolve those di sagreements. And that is the Bar Council. You go to them, and they resolve it. If I am wrong, what are they going to say? The Bar Council are going to say, You’re wrong. Mr. Crockwell is right, and you move on. Or they might say, Well, you know, it’s a picayune point. It’s a trivial point you are taking, Mr. AG. We give a waiver. It is not a big deal. That is what the Bar does. They have disciplinary process; they deal w ith these things.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak? The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 34. The Honourable and Learned K. N. Wi lson, you have the floor. LEADERSHIP
Ms. Kim N. WilsonThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I will be very brief. You know, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think all of us here, notwithstanding the positions that we may take on various matters, do our best to provide for our constituents, as well as to show leadership. And, Madam Deputy Speaker, I …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I will be very brief. You know, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think all of us here, notwithstanding the positions that we may take on various matters, do our best to provide for our constituents, as well as to show leadership. And, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think we can agree that when it comes to great leaders, they are generally decision makers. And when we think of someone who is a great leader, one of the characteristics that comes to my mind is decisiveness, a person who takes their vision and a successful leader who stands and di ctates —(sorry) stands and provides leadership, pr ovides the impetus to grow and to move and to provide a comfort for people to know that, This is my leader, and this is what this person stands for. They do not act indecisive or uncertain about things or hedging their bets. They are very decisive and decision makers. And, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think that . . . I am a little bit disappointed in what I saw this evening. And what do I mean by that?
The Depu ty Speaker: Be careful about reflecting, okay?
Ms. Kim N. WilsonOkay. We have the Honourable Premier, who is the leader, who is elected to be the Premier of this country. And we have heard him say previously that he believes that marriage is a union between a man and a woman and that he feels that the Government is of …
Okay. We have the Honourable Premier, who is the leader, who is elected to be the Premier of this country. And we have heard him say previously that he believes that marriage is a union between a man and a woman and that he feels that the Government is of the view that marriage is also between a man and a woman, albeit he did say he misspoke. But that was the statement that came out. We have also heard how the Premier has indicated that he s upports civil unions. And we also heard, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Premier basically lambast the Opposition—and I am quoting —when he said that “We as the Gover nment are showing leadership on the subject of samesex union, unlike the Opposition, who are t aking the easy way out by staying largely silent on same- sex marriages.” So it brings me to my beginning point i nsofar as, what do I look for in a leader, and being a person who makes a decisive decision and articulates that decision, articulates a vote of confidence and articulates a vision? But what we saw this evening was the opp osite of that. On two very, very important issues that have pretty much hijacked Bermuda for the last eight, nine, ten months, certainly since the amendments in 2013, and there have been campaigns and inform ation and discussions through the dinner table and the restaurants and the barber shops everywhere, a very highly emotive issue. . . And I am actually quoting the Premier, because he did indicate that these were highly emotive issues. But yet, when we vote on it, we have two votes concerning an amendment, a pr oposed amendment, and the initial amendment Bill that was tabled, and we rose for progress a couple of months ago. And we have a Premier who is the leader of this country abstaining, And when you look up the definition of “ abstention, ” if I may, I am just quoting from Webster’s, “the act of voluntarily refraining from taking some action, such as casting a vote or participating in a dec ision . . .” And I do not know about you, Madam Deputy Speaker, but it does cause me concern when we have the Premier of our country not prepared to act or make a decision about something that is critically i mportant and that has taken up a large portion of Bermuda’s psyche and the discussions that have surfaced throughout the last several months. And I have to ask whether or not that attribute shows one [is] a leader and a decision maker. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerAre there any other Members who would like to speak? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 21. You have the floor. GUN VIOLENCE AND CRIME IN BLACK COMM UNITY 2462 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly Mr. Rolfe Commissiong: Thank you, Madam …
Are there any other Members who would like to speak? Thank you. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 21. You have the floor.
GUN VIOLENCE AND CRIME IN BLACK COMM UNITY
2462 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly Mr. Rolfe Commissiong: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The night is drawing nigh. And certainly, we have heard the voices of many tonight. And I am sure that this House will continue to reflect those voices in our community, voices that are calling for change, voices of people who are hurt, who are broken, people who are in despair. Madam Deputy Speaker, tonight we saw the passage of a Bill that was of great concern and interest to thousands in our community. This follows a referendum. I am not going to reflect, only to say that with all the campaigning and interest that was shown on that one issue over the last eight, nine, ten, fourteen months, I would just beg those people who led that campaign to come out and show the same interest on other issues that are destroying our community, because I do not see them! With all due respect, I do not see them. I see them on this issue. But too many of them are missing on the other key issues. What is going on with our young black males, the violence, the socio- economic marginalisation of Bermudians, particularly black Bermudians? The fact that too many of our people are not earning a living wage. Are these not issues that are important to members of this faith- based comm unity? They are quick to call themselves Christians when, in truth, they represent about one or two or three denominations of Christianity. But we need them, too. Wher e are they? Will they now go silent now that their will has been manifest? We need them to stay in the public domain and be advocates on behalf of these critically important issues. I heard the Honourable and Learned Member, the Independent Member, talk about his cousin, whom I knew. He talked about the St. David’s branch of his family. My niece through marriage sat right in the same class with him at St. David’s Primary, and she talked about how she really liked Fiqre and used to help him with his lessons. You would see Fiqre, and you would say, Well, there’s a man without any enemies. But Lord, how we were wrong. There is an article in the Royal Gazette today, an editorial. It says, and I quote, with your permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, “This should be a Black Armband Cup Match.” And the editor, of course, the callousness being the brutal heinous callous murder of Fiqre Crockwell, who was a prominent member of the St. George's Cricket Club Cup Match team over the preceding decade. Some people may not rem ember. But let me just remind them, Fiqre was also a winner of the Cup Match Classic Safe Hands Award, probably around circa 2008/09, in that region. A tragic, tragic loss for our community. If I just may, the Royal Gazette here, Madam Deputy Speaker, it says here, “But two communities are still in mourning and it is incumbent on us to have more than a degree of empathy with them —St David’s islanders and St Georgians. The hurt and sense of loss will last for a good while. “Whatever your thoughts on Fiqre Crockwell, this should be a Black Armband Cup Match, for his death cuts right to the core of what is destroying Ber-muda.” The editor goes on to say, “ Unmitigated vi olence, social repression, widespread intolerance, xenophobia, homophobia, Bible- bashing, general ap athy—and that is before the politicians are let loose to get at each others’ throats without moving the conver-sation forward. ” And I will finish with this quote, this paragraph: “This country is populated by so many angry people, young black men i ncluded, who are a trigger mov ement away from snapping. Pressures at home, pres-sures at work, pressures earning a living, pressures justifying their existence, pressures preserving their existence. ” It is all connected. When we talk about the li ving wage, we are talking about this group. When you look in the Royal Gazette earlier in the week (and I do not want to sound like I am advertising the Royal Gazette) , we had an article featuring the Honourable Member Michael Weeks, from constituency 16, and others . The headline here said, “I nstitute is a loss still keenly felt.” But the loss that they are talking about is not of a person, but of an instit ution called Technical Institute. Job training remains a concern since BTI [Bermuda Technical Institute] closed in 1972. This, too, tells a story of where and what has happened to this community. You remember the passing of Uncle Henry Talbot. That is what I would call him. Not too long ago, we find out that his father, a black contractor in the early 1960s, built Technical Institute, along with Central School, along with many of the houses at the base land. Why not 25 years later, 30 years later, that that company was not the next D & J or the next Biermans or Burrell and Conyers ?
[Inaudible interjection]
Mr. Rolf e CommissiongThe Member makes jest. We need to understand how these things are linked with what is happening today. In the article, they mention the Mincy Report. The Mincy Report was a comparative study between young black males and their same- age peers on the issues of earnings, ed ucation, job …
The Member makes jest. We need to understand how these things are linked with what is happening today. In the article, they mention the Mincy Report. The Mincy Report was a comparative study between young black males and their same- age peers on the issues of earnings, ed ucation, job opportunities and the like. And at the end of the day, the final report, they said that if you put in all the factors, you still were left with a void that was represented by about 25- or-so per cent that repr esented structural racism, when you take everything else into account, that was impacting upon the lives of these young working- class men. I wrote a column the other day —and I am coming back to this issue next week; this is just my opening here. I wrote a co lumn that was in the paper
Bermuda House of Assembly a few weeks ago, Madam Deputy Speaker. And I spoke about all those men of my generation, black men, who were mowed down like grass as a cons equence of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, close to 200 of them. Why? Because these were men who w ere using heroin, and to some degree cocaine, intrav enously, [and they were] sharing needles. And when the epidemic hit our streets in the early 1980s, from that period up until the late 1990s, it had wiped out almost 200 of them. Some families lost two sons. Some families lost three sons. With the piece I wrote on Muhammad Ali only two weeks ago or three or four weeks ago on the advent of his death, I was down at the hospital. And I spoke to a mother whom I know from Mount Hill. I know her family. Her son and myself, we played football together as young boys. He became a well -known Bermuda footballer. I am not going to call the family’s name. And we were at the hospital to visit a friend, and she was there. She takes dialysis. And I went over to her. I gav e her a kiss on the cheek. And we sat down and talked for a little while. And she had seen my piece about Muhammad Ali. And she talked about Butchie, her son, who had come home excitedly because he had met Muhammad Ali in school. She spoke of him as if he was still alive, but Butchie had died so many years ago, along with another son, as both of them died as a consequence of HIV/AIDS and using needles and sharing needles with one another. So, these types of impacts upon the black male working- class communi ty are not new. We forget about it. How many remember all those guys who are gone now? They are gone. Black lives, or at least the lives of black men, in this country seem not to have a lot of value, particularly those who come from wor king-class families. Almost 200 of them —what about the sons, wives, girlfriends they left behind? The chi ldren, as I said? How many of these young boys who came with the succeeding generations grew up wit hout the benefit of having their fathers around? Most of those men had c hildren. By the time many of them began to die, I would think that most of their children were five, six, seven years old. The mothers had to bring up those children on their own. Like I said, some families lost three sons. A number of them lost two sons in the same family, from St. George's up to Dockyard. And so, we can make jokes. We can turn the other way. We can think that we can prosecute and persecute and incarcerate ourselves out of this problem. No, we cannot. Because unless we are prepared to look at the underlying causes, the down escalator will still be operating, tak-ing many of those young men, and now even some young women, mainly black, on that downward trajectory. So we have to go back and have an honest conversation. Because at the heart of this —and I am going to close with this, but I am going to come back to this next week. At the heart of this is what I call the intersectionality in terms of causation, between socioeconomic reality and racism, structural and otherwise. And the interplay of those factors is accounting for these outcomes on a multi -generational basis within Bermuda’s black community. But let us hope that Fiqre Crockwell’s death will not be in vain. And we say that over and over, every time. But there are some who are deter mined not to let people forget. We cannot let people forget. We cannot be at a point where this becomes normalised, because all it does, it just corrodes the Bermudian spirit. It brings us to a more cynical place. It just starts feeding on each other. So i t gets worse and worse with each generation because we keep trying to kick that can down the road, that intersectionality between socio- economic reality and marginalisation and racism! That is the reality of the Bermuda that we live in. Let us acknowledge that, and let us be honest about it. So anyway, Madam Deputy Speaker, like I said, I want to come back to this next week. I want to talk about the Mincy Report. I want to talk about a government that did not want to really talk about the underlying causes , that talked about issues at the back end that were designed to just deal with the symptoms rather than cause. And we all thought that, because there was a lull in that first 2012 and 2013, that some of us thought we had turned the corner. But we have seen those lulls before. And now you see that it explodes again with a vengeance. So we have not turned the corner, by a long shot. And we still have to do that fundamental work. And I am asking again, one final admonition and call. Let my faith- based community, those who were so on the ramparts on the issue that we talked about earlier tonight —please, stay engaged with this community. We need you on these issues as well. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 18. Mr. E. D. G. Burt, you have the floor.
Mr. E. David BurtGood evening Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to co mmend the Member who just took his seat, because he has a sincere passion for thi s topic. And he has r emained consistent in this time, whether it was in Parliament or before. And I specifically …
Good evening Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to co mmend the Member who just took his seat, because he has a sincere passion for thi s topic. And he has r emained consistent in this time, whether it was in Parliament or before. And I specifically want to speak about one thing which he said, and that is the issue of root causes. And I have said it many times, and I will continue to say it many times, that black men are not genetically predispositioned to murder each other. There are societal factors at play. And as persons r esponsible for leading the country, we have to take a real hard look at the societal factors that lead to persons who feel that they have no other way to go except for turning guns on one another. And that is all I will say about it, Madam Deputy Speaker. 2464 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report B ermuda House of Assemb ly And I look forward to hearing more contributions, and I look forward to hearing more from the Government on what they are going to do on the root causes. CCTV is not going to do it. Those additional items will not do it. It is about root causes and focus-ing on the root causes. When you cut after -school programmes, it only makes the issue worse, not better. And we need to focus on making sure we address and tackle the root causes. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND PROCUREMENT OFFICE CODE OF PRACTICE
Mr. E. David BurtNow, Madam Deputy Speaker, eight months ago in the Government’s Throne Sp eech (probably nine months now) . . . nine months ago in the Government’s Throne Speech, the Premier said that they would publish the Office of Project Manage-ment and Procurement Code of Practice. And we have heard that, …
Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, eight months ago in the Government’s Throne Sp eech (probably nine months now) . . . nine months ago in the Government’s Throne Speech, the Premier said that they would publish the Office of Project Manage-ment and Procurement Code of Practice. And we have heard that, and they said it would be published by the end of the year. Here we are, near to the end of the session, no code in sight. So I am hoping when the Honourable Premier closes this debate, if he will give any indication— he cannot abstain from closing — but if he will give any indication as to when we might expect this item to come not even to the House, just to be put on the website like he promised would be done by December 31 st, 2015. Half the year is gone already. Something that was promised that long ago surely cannot be that delayed. So one must wonder, why is it that this Government will not release a document, which we under-stand has already been given to some Government departments? And it speaks to a very important issue, I think, because it speaks to that of honesty, open-ness, transparency, integrity, these types of things. I would like to quote from an e- mail, which I am sure, Madam Deputy Speaker, you may have r eceived early this week, from the Chairman of the One Bermuda Alliance, Ms. Lynne Woolridge, or Senator Lynne Woolridge, basically speaking about the resi gnation of a Member of Parliament, Shawn Crockwell. And in this, in talking about how the One Bermuda Alliance may want to reflect, the Chairman said, and I quote: “There are times when we each need to pause and renew our commitment to the party’s core values of inclusiveness, transparency, responsibility, integrity and service.” I would like to focus on transparency, responsibility and integrity. Because I think that it is clear that, whether it was from the presentation that we heard from the Honourable Member from constit uency 31 about his view that the Honourable Attorney General deliberately misled Parliament earlier, or be-cause, for us, we know that it is not a surprise, b ecause Members of the One Bermuda Alliance front bench have routinely misled this Parliament with i mpunity on numerous occasions, with no sanction, no responsibility, no accountability. And it is just accepted by the Premier of this country. But now it seems as though they have gone — Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Point of order.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Your point of order is? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading] Hon. R. Wayne Scott: I am sorry; I think the Member is misleading the House. I do not know if it is inte ntional or unintentional. I sit on the front bench. I would like to know when I …
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 18.
Mr. E. David BurtI was unaware that this was question/answer session. But I will go on, Madam Deputy Speaker. It seems as though the Government has moved from misleading Parliament to now misleading civil servants , because in the Public Accounts Committee, at a recent session we were made privy to a document …
I was unaware that this was question/answer session. But I will go on, Madam Deputy Speaker. It seems as though the Government has moved from misleading Parliament to now misleading civil servants , because in the Public Accounts Committee, at a recent session we were made privy to a document that was written to the Financial Secretary from the Accountant General. And in that he says that the permission of which he gave in September 2014, when he gave it, he was never informed by the Minis-try that they had already identified a contractor in A econ. And had he known, his permission would have been different. AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Mr. E. David BurtAnd I want to read some of this, because it is quite incredible, thinking that a memo from the highest accounting office in this land will go to his boss, basically saying, You asked me to a pprove something without giving me the complete i nformation, and then are relying …
And I want to read some of this, because it is quite incredible, thinking that a memo from the highest accounting office in this land will go to his boss, basically saying, You asked me to a pprove something without giving me the complete i nformation, and then are relying on the approval of which I gave, which I could not have possibly given had I had that complete level of information. He goes and says, “I was initially of the understanding that it was CCC who introduced Aecon to this transaction.” Now, if the Accountant General is learning about this transaction from the Ministry of Finance, then the only place where he can possibly get that information would be from the Ministry of Finance. Now, I am uncertain if the Accountant General met directly with the Minister. I cannot speak to that. When the Minister responds, hopefully he can make that clear. But it is clear that the Ministry did not pr ovide complete information to the Accountant General. He then goes on to say, “My read of this is that Aecon was the intended construction partner,
Bermuda House of Assembly which was not my initial understanding when the CCC Letter Agreement was provided to me.” So here we are, an Accountant General issuing permission to b ypass Financial Instructions and is not given compete information. It is almost as though it is a lie by omi ssion. So if you tell the Accountant General, I want you to approve this transaction, this sole- source transaction, and you do not tell the Accountant General that you have already pic ked a construction contractor. You just give him the front of CCC. We remember from the documents, where Aecon, even before this took place, was saying, It would be good if we maintained the CCC cover. It seems the maintaining of the CCC cover was not onl y for Aecon when they are visiting the Island, but it also went to the Ministry of Finance when they were giving information to the Accountant General for his approval. I will read some more, because it says, “Based upon my read of the above- mentioned CCC document and their indication that Aecon was the originator for the transaction, I can say that I was under the impression that the construction contractor was yet to be selected. My interpretation of CCC’s selection document is that my original impression was incorrect. However, based on my understanding at that time, that there was no contractor selected, I was not providing permission through the construction phase of this project.” So, what does that mean, Madam Deputy Speaker? It means that the Accountant General, the only person who can approve the bypassing of Fina ncial Instructions, has said that he has not given permission for this project. And he has made it very clear. Now, one would think that a Government that is looking to rededicate itself to its core values of transparency, responsibility and integrity would say, Well, maybe we made a mistake. But, no. The Mini ster of Finance today, in today’s newspaper, basically doubled down on his (and I will leave it this way) lie by omission to the Acc ountant General. Because in that, he says, and this is from today’s daily, if I may . . . When asked, he says, “ Quite frankly I cannot account for what the Accountant -General thought [.] I can only account for what is written on a particular document that authorised the whole process and has his sign ature on it. ” That is the contempt for which the Minister of Finance will hold his very own Accountant General. Because I happen to know Mr. Curtis Stovell. I am certain the Minister of Finance knows Mr. Curtis Stovell. I am certain that many people know Mr. Curtis Stovell, and I do not believe that there is anyone who will question the integrity of Mr. Curtis Stovell. So when the Accountant General says that he was not provided with the information, did the Min ister of Finance just want him to think of something out of his head, to start reading minds, to pull out the old crystal ball and say, Oh. Well, maybe I should have asked. Because he goes on and says, the Minister of Finance, “ What he thought and what he didn’t think is a matter for him —I can be held accountable for the dictates of financial instructions and we have fulfilled those requirements. If he had a misunderstanding he should have asked questions certainly. ” So, was the Accountant General just supposed to, all of a sudden, come up with the fact that I’m going to assume that the Ministry, when asking for bypassing Financial Instructions on such a major pr oject, is going to withhold the fact that we already have selected a contractor? Was that something that the Accountant General should reasonably expect and then should go back to the Minister and say, Okay, Minister. Just to be clear, you haven’t selected a co ntractor, have you? Is that what you are expecting the Accountant General to say, Minister? Is that what you mean when you are speaking about this? He should have asked questions if there was any uncertainty? I think that the Accountant General made it very clear. He was not provided with the information. And this Government sought permission based upon incom-plete information. Because we know that the Minister, when he came and first revealed these documents, told Parliament —Parliament! —in November . . . this was after the permission was given that the Minister came and told Parliament that CCC will select a vendor. So it is clear that the Minister would have misled the A ccountant General, because he came to Parliament and misled us, said that they “ will.” Will is future tense. If you have already selected a vendor, if you know that there is a vendor in place, you do not say will. You say, We have. But that would have been a bridge too far, because that would have meant, as the A ccountant General said, that he would have asked for more information. He would have asked for the value - for-money analy sis. He would have done his job! He would have asked the correct questions to make sure that our public purse was protected. Again, Madam Deputy Speaker, transparency, responsibility and integrity. We know that transpar-ency is lacking with the One Bermuda Alliance, a Government that has refused to comply with a prop-erly issued summons of a committee of this Parli ament. We know that they feel as though if the people should not know what they have contracted to. We know that when it comes to an issue of integrity, when the Accountant General of this country is saying that the very own Minister of Finance will not even give him the complete information, and then will rely on permission that is given basically under false pr etence, to say, Oh, he gave me permis sion for the entire project, when he did not even tell, give the complete information for it. When the Accountant General has to follow -up with memos asking for additional i nformation and is ignored by the Ministry, and the only time that a response comes is when the Ministry is embarrassed in front of the Public Accounts Commi t2466 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly tee, then they decide, Oh, maybe we should talk to the Accountant General. Maybe we should talk to the Office of Project Management and Procurement. It begs the question, How is this Government continuing? And why does the Premier continue to allow it to happen? But I think we saw the evidence earlier today. And quite frankly, Madam Deputy Speaker, watching the Clerk call for names, calling the name of the Honourable Premier and sile nce in response, tells the people of this country all they need to know. It tells them why Ministers can come to Parliament and not give answers to questions. It tells them why Ministers can get away with not giving complete information to civil servants, get away with not responding to Parli amentary summonses. It explains the reason why Mi nisters can refuse to move into their offices and have the Government spend additional money to construct new ones at the same point in time that they are cutting after -school programmes, and I have to knock on the doors of my constituents this weekend, having them to hear complaints about the disrepair of the schools inside of their community. It all makes sense now. Because it seems that the Premier is unable to take a decision. It seems that the Premier is unable to take a position. And it seems that the Premier is unable to lead his Cabinet and his Government. We see his Government losing Members. We see them arguing amongst themselves right here in this Parliament. We see them looking to amend their very own Bills that they bring here, that pass through Cabinet, that pass through LegCo, that have the support. And then we are seeing them look-ing to amend Bills on the floor. And finally, as we saw, a Premier who cannot t ake a position. Madam Deputy Speaker, I gave a speech in March. I stood up and I said that the Premier of this country is weak. Some persons said I was too harsh. So I am going to correct that, and I am going to say it is clear that the Premier’s leadersh ip is weak. And it is clear that he has lost control of his Cabinet, clearer today than it was that time in March. However, it does not require me, Madam Deputy Speaker, to say that today, because the Premier himself has passed his own verdict on his weak leadership when he failed to be counted earlier today. This Government, Madam Deputy Speaker, is on borrowed time. It is very clear that this Government is not going to last that much longer, because if they cannot keep themselves together on these matter s, it only pales to see what will happen when the tougher issues come, when it comes to the issue of a new budget, when it comes to an issue of actually trying to come to Parliament and passing through an issue with the airport. So, we will see. However, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will close here and say I think that it is a shame that the Honourable Premier cannot take a position, but it is not surprising that not only can he not take a position, but that he cannot control his Mi n-isters. And I would hope at s ome point in time, the Honourable Premier, whose chairman said that his party needs to recommit to their core ideals and transparency, will somehow find a way to defend how his Minister of Finance and his Deputy Premier can get away with misleading civil s ervants for permission for the largest project in this country’s history. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. Are there any other Members who would like to speak? The Chair recognises the Finance Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) R ichards: Good evening, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am getting rained on again here.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerOh, still? [Inaudible interjection] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Well, we have heard a lot of hot air from the Honourable Member. Let us get down to facts. Facts always speak louder than words. I have here, if you allow me to read it, a copy of the memorandum from …
Oh, still?
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Well, we have heard a lot of hot air from the Honourable Member. Let us get down to facts. Facts always speak louder than words. I have here, if you allow me to read it, a copy of the memorandum from the Accountant General relating to this matter, the airport matter. The conclusion reads as follows: “In the case of the airport and bridge pr ojects”—and might I say parenthetically that, at that point, we thought the bridge (i.e., the Causeway) was included; i t is not now.
Mr. E. David BurtI was just wondering what doc ument you are reading from.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMember, have a seat. He has not yielded. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: I already said what document I am reading from.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberPay attention. Hon. E. T. (Bob ) Richards: Yes. Pay attention. “In the case of the airport and bridge projects, based on the above factors supporting the appointment of CCC, I give permission to waive the requir ement for three quotations for the services to be pr ovided under the …
Pay attention.
Hon. E. T. (Bob ) Richards: Yes. Pay attention. “In the case of the airport and bridge projects, based on the above factors supporting the appointment of CCC, I give permission to waive the requir ement for three quotations for the services to be pr ovided under the LA.” Now, the LA refers to the Letter of Agreement (right?) which we had to roll over se veral times. And I have a copy of the Letter of Agre ement here. And on the second page of the Letter of Agreement, it says here, under the subtitle of Structure and CCC Team, “CCC will source premiere C aBermuda House of Assembly nadian development and construction expertise to develop and implement the project under the CCC umbrella. Any firm or firms so selected shall have been subject to CCC’s due diligence and vetting in terms of technical, financi al and managerial capabil ities and shall be subject to prior due diligence and approval to be completed by Bermuda. CCC shall, as a matter of transparency and cooperation, provide Bermuda with reasonably complete, accurate and current information concernin g the nature and scope of such firm selection, due diligence and vetting undertakings. The selected Canadian firm, together with its team of required specialist consultants, advisors and subcontractors, shall, together with CCC, constitute the CCC Team.” So, later on in this Letter of Agreement, Madam Deputy Speaker, it describes in some detail the phases of the development itself. Now, I have said many times in public presentations on this matter that we are using a phased development process. And the Letter of Agreement describes the phases. Phase 1(a) talks about preliminary due diligence, project scoping and airport project concept. And that sort of takes two pages. Then Phase 1(b), the Airport Development Agreement, which we signed last summer, and goes on to describe exactly what is in that. Then it says Phase 2, “Development Agreement deliverables to construct and concession contracts.” And Phase 3, “Financing Phase.” So that is all, Madam Deputy Speaker, and other miscellaneous things. That is all i n this, compri sing those two letters in the memorandum which the Accountant General signed, the LA, the Letter of Agreement. So for the Accountant General to say that he was not informed about the structure and the process involved here just is not true. I t just is not true.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerYour point of order is? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. E. David BurtThe Honourable Minister is mi sleading the House. The Accountant General did not say he was not informed about the process. The A ccountant General said that he was not informed that a contractor had been selected prior to his knowledge.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Finance Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Sometimes, the Honourable Member does not listen. Because that is why I went into detail about the description of this CCC Team. CCC has already pre- selected contractors. A econ was one of those. So it …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Finance Minister.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Sometimes, the Honourable Member does not listen. Because that is why I went into detail about the description of this CCC Team. CCC has already pre- selected contractors. A econ was one of those. So it did not matter whether it was Aecon, B -con or C -con. It did not matte r, right? You know, it would have been one of CCC’s stable of contractors. In this case, Madam Deputy Speaker, they did not select some behind- the-wall company, a Grade “X” company. What was selected was the lar gest developer in Canada. Now, people are talking about, Well, who originated this transaction? The transaction is a transaction between the Bermuda Government and CCC, the Canadian Government. Anything outside of that does not count. So, whatever conversations Aecon or B -con or C -con had with CCC is of no consequence to Bermuda. Because none of those cons had any contact with the Bermuda Go vernment. The first contact —I have said this many times —the first contact we had with the people i nvolved with this team was when I took my team, i ncluding the At torney General and the FS [Financial Secretary] to Toronto to meet CCC.
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberThat is not true. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: What do you mean it is not true? I cannot take this, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Honourable Member is now just calling me a liar, saying it is not true. He was not there! He does not know.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThe point of order is? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. E. David BurtThe Honourable Minister is mi sleading the House, because the Honourable Minister will know full well that his consultants of CIBC had contact with Aecon prior to his coming to Toronto. So if he did not, for the Government, his very own consultants whom he retained and selected had contact.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Finance Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: So he is changing his tune. He said that I had contact. Now it is my consul tant had contact. The fact is that we had no contact with them. And the consultant was not my …
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognises the Finance Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: So he is changing his tune. He said that I had contact. Now it is my consul tant had contact. The fact is that we had no contact with them. And the consultant was not my consultant at the time! [Inaudible interjections ]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: They were not working at all. They made an introduction.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerMembers, I would prefer not to hear side comments. Thank you very much. 2468 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richard s: So, the whole notion that the permission to waive Financial Instructions was somehow not valid . . . First …
Members, I would prefer not to hear side comments. Thank you very much.
2468 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richard s: So, the whole notion that the permission to waive Financial Instructions was somehow not valid . . . First of all, remember, the assertion was made that there was no permission. And then when we produced this document and it was published in the paper, the story changed. Well, now you have a signed permission, but somehow it is not valid because the person who signed it didn’t know. Well, we now see from this Letter of Agreement that the person who signed that waiver had every opportunity to see the entire layout of the process. Because I remember he said, Well, you know, we did not know. I only thought that I was approving this Letter of Agreement, instead of the whole process. Well, the Letter of Agreement itself describes the whole process. So that j ust does not fly. And what we have had is a lot of bombastic political rhetoric here that does not hold any water at all. These are the facts. The facts are clear. Now, as I said many times publicly, I never met anybody from Aecon. I never knew anybody fr om Aecon until we went to Toronto on that fateful trip. So there is nobody hiding anything. And, you know, whether the Accountant General knew about Aecon, it did not matter. Because he was approving the waiver of Financial Instructions for a process that was clearly described in this document. And it did not matter what contractor you slotted into it. It did not matter at all. And another point I would like to make crystal clear, the Bermuda Government did not select Aecon. We did not select them. CCC sel ects them. They s elect, according to this, their due diligence, they pres elect firms that do work with them. So, Bermuda did not select Aecon. That has to be made perfectly clear. And it seems that, from the things that are seen from the Accountant General , he still does not seem to understand that. I do not get that. He still does not seem to understand that. But the Bermuda Government did not select Aecon. They were at the first meeting that we had in Toronto. That is where they were. I met them then, nev er heard of them before. So, we need to just stop this. As I said to the lady from the Royal Gazette yesterday, Just keep throwing up this red herring. Because it has nothing to do with anything. The CCC could have selected an ybody. They could have select ed anybody. They were the ones who were driving this particular transaction. And the transaction, I repeat, is based —
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerYour point of order is? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. E. David BurtThe Honourable Minister is mi sleading the House. It is clear the Minister keeps on saying that CCC was driving the transaction. It is clear, as it was from the Accountant General’s memo, in the case of the redevelopment of the L. F. Wade International Airport, CCC was introduced to …
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The conversations that CCC had with Aecon are irrelevant to this. I repeat for the Honourable Member who continues not to hear what I say: The transaction in question is a transaction between Bermuda and CCC. That is …
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: The conversations that CCC had with Aecon are irrelevant to this. I repeat for the Honourable Member who continues not to hear what I say: The transaction in question is a transaction between Bermuda and CCC. That is the transaction. Everything else is built on top of that. So whatever conversation Aecon had with CCC is irrelevant to this transaction. Because that is the basis of this. The prime contractor in this model is not Aecon. The prime contractor is CCC.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerYour point of order is? POINT OF ORDER [Misleading]
Mr. E. David BurtThe Honourable Minister is mi sleading the House. We are getting incomplete information once more. Because we are talking about the prime contractor for construction. But we know that CCC has not contracted with the Government for the privatisation for 30 y ears. That is Project Co, which is majority …
The Honourable Minister is mi sleading the House. We are getting incomplete information once more. Because we are talking about the prime contractor for construction. But we know that CCC has not contracted with the Government for the privatisation for 30 y ears. That is Project Co, which is majority owned by Aecon. So he cannot split the two. They are inextricably linked.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Deputy Speaker, the Honourable Member is not the Minister of F inance. He is not in this Government. But somehow he claims to know more than I do. Now, I am stating categorically that, even according to …
Thank you. The Chair recognises the Minister. Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Madam Deputy Speaker, the Honourable Member is not the Minister of F inance. He is not in this Government. But somehow he claims to know more than I do. Now, I am stating categorically that, even according to this, CCC is the prime contractor. They are designated as those words —prime contractor. N ow, he can say whatever he likes. It does not change the truth. CCC is the prime contractor. Aecon are a subcontractor, the principal subcontractor, and they both form part of the CCC Team. It is not called the Aecon Team. It is called the CCC Team. Okay? Nobody is denying that Project Co is going to have a concession. But I want to put a point across the bow of the Honourable Member, because he is saying that the airport has been privatised. It is not! It is not. He continues to mislead the House and mislead the people of Bermuda. But I am not going to let that happen. Because the airport has not been pr ivatised. And I have said this a hundred times. This is a public/private partnership.
Bermuda House of Assembly I do not know how to say this any more si mply. There are 563 people who work part time or full time at the airport, 563 of them. Of that 563, the only people who work for the government who will be wor king for Project Co, the potential is 43—43. Those are not the only people who work for government.
[Inaudible interjecti on]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Oh! Who else works for the government? The Honourable Member wants to know. Well, let us see now. We have the airport police. We have Customs and Immigration. We have ITO. We have Bermuda Weather Service. Plus, we have hundr eds, about 400 other people who are pr ivate sector people who work at the airport. Now, we have got 40 people out of 563 who are going from government employee to this private company. Yet the Honourable Member says it is being privatised, when the asset in question, the airport i tself, will not change hands. The ownership of that asset will not change hands. The new asset that is going to be built will continue to belong to the people of Bermuda. So this is just misleading the people, just mi sleading peo ple. I mean, we are talking about fewer than 10 per cent of the people who work at the airport are being transferred—fewer than 10 per cent! And you know what, Madam Deputy Speaker? Most, like the other 90 per cent, already are privatised. That is the thing. All of these people already work for private enterprise. They work for the airlines. They work for vendors who work there. They work for cleaning com-panies. They work for CI 2. They work for all these other companies, Sol Petroleum, Cedar Aviation, Menzi es—these are all people who work at the ai rport. And that is all private enterprise. So, you know, if you want to look at this, the answer is simple. The airport has long been priv atised. It was privatised a long time ago. Because 80 per cent of the peopl e who work down there work for private enterprise. So, you know, all of a sudden there is something super -special about these 40 pe ople. And I do not even think it is 40 who are going over to Project Co. Some of them are going to work for the airport quango, which will be government owned. So, you see, the Honourable Member just continues to try to mislead the public, try to make them feel that som ething untoward is going on, when nothing untoward is going on. He talks about transparency. Well, we have been more transparent on this project than any other project in the history of Bermuda. Yet he is complai ning about transparency. The other P -3 that took place, the one that his Government put forward, the whole thing was shrouded in secrecy. They even conduc ted meetings for the hospital in Toronto so that nobody could find out what was going on! [Inaudible interjection]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: That is right. They all flew to Toronto to have meetings. Right? Because they did not want anybody to know what was going on here. They have a document that is housed in the hospital library that has got redactions all over the place. My colleague from the other place made a brilliant speech and explanation on things that were redacted. I mean, one of the things that is amazing that is redacted is the obligations of the Government of Bermuda under that contract! The fact that we had to guarantee payments, debt repayments. The Gover nment of Bermuda has to guarantee those things. And that part of it is redacted.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Well, yes. I am not sure if he was Junior Minister then. But in any case, so you have something that is clearly of public importance, the Government’s r esponsibilities to guarantee interest and principal pa yments for the hospital, but the public still does not have access to the terms and conditions of that r esponsibility, of that obligation. Still do not have the information on . . . The people’s obligations to that facility have been redacted, have been bl acked out, have been obscured so that it cannot be found out in any way, shape or form. So, when you hear this talk about lack of transparency, it is totally hypocritical, totally hypocrit ical. And it has no value whatsoever. So that is the difference, Madam Deputy Speaker, between rhetoric and facts. I can tell you that rhetoric is hollow, is loud and hollow, like empty vessels that make the most noise, the old- timers used to say. But what we have to deal with is cold, hard facts. But one last thing that I want to say here is that —
[Timer beeps]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Okay, my time is up. I will save that for another time.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you very much. Are there any other Members who would like to speak? The Chair recognises the Member from co nstituency 36, the Honourable and Learned Member,
Mr. M. J. Scott.
Hon. Michael J. ScottThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, with interest, we have listened to the response of the Minister of F inance for this country, to the Ac countant General, i ndicating in a written document that he was misled. And then, in responding, the Minister of Finance has 2470 …
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, with interest, we have listened to the response of the Minister of F inance for this country, to the Ac countant General, i ndicating in a written document that he was misled. And then, in responding, the Minister of Finance has 2470 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report B ermuda House of Assemb ly read the Letter of Agreement, the LOA, which, contained in that LOA is a statement from CCC, as I understand it. And I tried to understand this with great difficulty. May I say that? But to the extent that . . . what I did gather from it was that the CCC declare that they preselected . . . they had teams which have been preselected, and they are contractors. The question begs, therefore, for this Minister, assisting his Bermuda Accountant General, was the pre-selection of contractors identified clearly enough, satisfactorily enough by this Minister of Finance for this Accountant General, whose primary responsibility is to manage the efficacy of value for money, and to grant exceptions to it, to waive it, only if he understands clearly that we have not ventured into a full - blown contract with a contractor of any description? Now, I listened as carefully as I could to our Minister of Fin ance. And I am not sure if the LOA was explicit or clear enough to our Accountant General to actually name Aecon as some of these preselected contractors. That would have, for example, given the Minister of Finance grounds on which to stand in this House today to say that the Accountant General had not only constructive knowledge, but actual know ledge. [ Inaudible interjections] Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: What difference does the name make? It makes no difference what name it is. Hon. Michael J. Scott: It does. It does. I am a lawyer, and I am talking about constructive and/or express real knowledge. And to bury in language that we preselect contractors, without let-ting your Accountant General know what the responsibilities that that Accountant General has to protect the purse of this country . . . If that LOA was as opaque as it appears to be, it is no wonder that we have a memo from the Accountant General indicating his lack of understanding. No, he makes it more express. He says he was misled. Now, I tried to listen and give the benefit of the doubt to the LOA as expressed by the Minister of Finance. I have difficulty with it. But I ask the question: If the perfect content of that LOA was a statement that CCC preselected contractors without expressly in dicating that the preselected contractors were Aecon, it is just so confusing. I am confused about it. And no wonder . . . That is my only point I make. No wonder the Accountant General has written the letter which he did write. And to his credit and to our credit, we have got to get to the bottom of this without all of this opaqueness. Things should be clear.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Member. Are there any other Members who would like to speak? The Chair recognises the Premier. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND PROCUREMENT OFFICE CODE OF PRACTICE Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As we bring this day to a close, there are a couple of things I …
Thank you, Member. Are there any other Members who would like to speak? The Chair recognises the Premier. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND PROCUREMENT OFFICE CODE OF PRACTICE Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As we bring this day to a close, there are a couple of things I just wanted to comment on. In r egard to the Honourable Member from constituency 18, who raised the issue of the Office of Management and Procurement, the Code of Practice, as I assured the Honourable Member previously, that code is out for consultation. And as soon as that is done and as soon as it has been reviewed, it will be put into play. That was my word, and I will move forward on that com-mitment to it. I also want to assure the Honourable Member, as I did before, that the Office still conducts their work to the highest standard. So while we are moving from one position to the next, Honourable Members in this Chamber and Honourable Members who have doubts in this Chamber should be assured that the good work of that department will continue to move forward in the most appropriate fashion. Now, I have listened to a lot on this motion to adjourn tonight. And some of the comments I will not even take on much at all. [ Inaudible interjections] LEADERSHIP Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Yes. My colleagues say not to dignify them with a response. In regard to leadership, all I will say is, if you are not in the position, it is easy to criticise. I will also say that when we took over, this country was broken. And so it is easy to sit on the other side and be critical of every issue. And as I reflect back, I look back, the airport comes up a lot. The Opposition has tried to derail progress too often over the past three and a half, four years. Desperation, as my colleagues say, and I agree. At times, it has been very desperate. But with the airport project, it has been one thing after the other. Might as well be magicians, because all they do is look at hallucination and smoke and mirrors. AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: And I think back about the work that the Finance Minister has put in with the team at the Ministry of Finance and the Mi nistry of Tourism and Transport. All the work that they have done to make sure that we can do something to the airport before it falls down around us, because that is a reality. If anyone has seen that documentary that is out there now, they will see that that is the reality. If we do not move forward fairly quickly, we have got real problems down there.
B ermuda House of Assembly And what I find so interesting about it (and Honourable Members on that side are yawning; I know it is getting late), but what I find so interesting about it, Honourable Members in the Opposition talk about transparency. But I do not hear any one of them, not one, talk about the ill, poor plans that they had when they were the Government, and the $3 mi llion that was spent. So, I mean, if the shoe fits, you have to wear it. But they seem to have thrown away the shoes, and they just want to forget about what happened in the past. Now, they knew we needed a new airport, because they had a plan that was much more grandiose than we have done, and they spent a lot of money without the people even knowing about it. They spent that money with looming storm clouds on the horizon for our economy. We are trying to do it in a different way. Because, as I said, we are broke. And we have to be creative. We have to do it in an appropriate way. And the Minister of Finance should be commended for how open and transparent he has been through this whole process, in spite of the derailment. But that is the role of some Oppositions, just to derail. They have tried to derail tour ism. They have tried to derail gaming. I just laughed a few weeks ago. All through, they have criticised the CEO of the Ber-muda Tourism Authority —criticised the whole tenure of his contract. And then when it is put out there . . . And they make up fictitious numbers about how much he got paid. I heard the Honourable Member who is not in the Chambers today, from constituency 29, say, He was getting paid $800,000 a year. Well, I don’t know, I don’t know. Maybe it’s $600,000. Well, it’s $800,000, I don’t know. He just made numbers up. Criticised him! And now, all of a sudden, as we see the plans, preparation and things start turning around, the church mice have gone silent. Yes, but they broke the silence when they heard that the honourable CEO, his contract w as coming to an end at the end of this year, and they wanted to thank him for his service. Really? Really, Madam Deputy Speaker? Thank him? After you beat him up for two years, you want to thank him? Really? That is just . . .
An Hon. Member An Hon. MemberHypocritical. HAMILTON PRINCESS AND ST. GEORGE’S HOTEL DESIGNATED CASINO GAMING SITES Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: It is hypocritical, but it is astounding that people could do that, astounding. And I hear Honourable Members on that side—being gracious . Foolish, not gracious. They want to beat up everything —hotel development. Crit …
Hypocritical. HAMILTON PRINCESS AND ST. GEORGE’S HOTEL DESIGNATED CASINO GAMING SITES Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: It is hypocritical, but it is astounding that people could do that, astounding. And I hear Honourable Members on that side—being gracious . Foolish, not gracious. They want to beat up everything —hotel development. Crit ical of hotel development. They are conjuring up a beach controversy in St. George's when they do not even know what the plans are yet. Is that not interes ting? St. George is a town that they neglected, took away revenue that they got, closed the golf course, k nocked down the clubhouse, blew up the hotel, closed the police station, chased away the cruise ships. And they want to try to derail a hotel project over a beach controversy when they do not even know what the plans are. Really, really interesting. The list goes on. Today, not reflecting on the Bill, but they had challenges with the Bill. But they could not even find one amendment. Really? We all know that we need to not only improve health care, access to health care, but control the costs. And you cannot find an amend-ment to a Bill? Now, that is not progress. That is trying to derail things. And all through the past three or four years, we have heard, Put more money into tourism. Put more money into education. Put more money into the police. Well, wait a second. If you put more money into all this stuff, where is it coming from? It is easy to sit on that side and be critical and not be correct. And then they conjure up these little things that are just a waste of time and breath. M inisterial offices —really? The Minister of Tourism and Transport and Municipalities is better served by being in town because most of his work is going to be around here. But I do not hear any of them criticised when a former Minister over there built a big, elaborate office. I do not hear any one of them talking about that. [ Inaudible interjections] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Yes. Their priority is education, but they moved the Education Department down to St. George's so the Minister does not have a long commute to work. Really? [ Laughter] Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Madam Deputy Speaker, then they conjure up a story about stone on North Shore Road. And it took the papers for about two weeks! Meanwhile, we are trying to turn around the economy and provide opportunity and hope for Bermudians. And we are talking about stone and trying to impugn the Minister’s credibility. Come on! Come on. You do not want progress ; you want to stand in the way and allow Bermudians to suffer! And they laugh. But I do not hear a point of order. And they laugh b ecause it is easy to sit on that side and throw 100 pieces of Jell -O on the wall, and if one sticks, well, that is not bad odds. That is not bad odds. Well, I am sorry, Madam Deputy Speaker. We have a lot of work to do. We are making progress. We still have a long way to go. Now, let me deal with crime just a bit. And I am pleased to see now the colleagues talk about it. But as I spoke about it two weeks ago, I do not hear any suggestions or solutions coming from the ot her side. And I would hope that the conversation could stimulate some solutions and suggestions as we go 2472 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
Bermuda House of Assemb ly forward. And the Honourable Member, the honourable colleague from constituency 31, my good friend, Shawn Crockwell, mentioned my absence at a f uneral. I do not need to explain my actions to anyone. Just watch closely what I do. The Honourable Member mentioned to me that he was concerned that I was not there. I ex-plained the reasons why I was not there. I reach out into this community probably on paralle l with anyone else in this Honourable Chamber. And so when pe ople question where I was and what I am doing, I take it to heart. Because when families struggle, we need to be there and show them that we care and show them the support that they need. And I am not going to stand here in the House and justify it. People can see what my actions were and justify it for themselves. I certainly do not appreciate the criticism. But I have got big shoulders. I can handle it. I can handle that criticism. And nobody i s happy about what took place in that incident. No one is happy. And I am glad the community came out and provided support to the family. Because all families need it. But where do we go from here?
GUN VIOLENCE AND CRIME IN BLACK COMM UNITY
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Now, let me repeat a couple of things which I continue to say. The solutions lie within us. We have many of the solutions in place, and they will work. But what we are missing . . . The police are going to do their work. The Government has put in teams within the community to help ease tensions, to work within the community, work with private organisations. But what we really need are two important things: We need to have the community stand up and say, Enough is enough. People know what goes on in this community, but all of a sudden, the courage that we find to speak out disappears when something happens. Fear takes over. And fear cannot be allowed to stop our progress in dealing with these types of challenges. We have grieving families, families who do not understand why this happened to them. The least we could do is stand up and show some courage and say what is taking place in this community, because people know. And it is a small element of our community that is doing these type of things. But you know what the sadness about it is? After it happens, a week or two or three weeks down the road, when the flowers that everyone in the community gave to those families have started to wilt and get thrown away, we have moved on. But the family still struggles. The family still has the pain. We have a responsibility to stand up and say what we know. And I do not want to hear the excuse, Well, I cannot be protected. I do not want to hear that excuse. It is a cop-out. Because people have done it before. We had to do it. There have been people who have stood up and said, Enough is enough, and I am going to give the information. There was a man stabbed the same night. People know what happened; no one wants to speak to the police. The police who are tryi ng to work on the Crockwell murder are waiting for more information. And there are people who know, and they will not talk. But they will sit around on a Friday night and talk about what they know. Are we going to let that small part of our society continu e to ruin our society? Are we going to continue to allow those people who are doing those types of deeds to come in our neighbourhoods and ruin our neighbourhoods, and then complain when something happens? Stand up! Do not wait until after it happens. Stand up and say something. And when you do, you will find there will be people to help you. We all have to stand up. And I challenge the community, stand up! Find somebody you can trust to give the information to. That is the first step. The second step is we have to continue to pull people out of that lifestyle. No one wants to be part of that lifestyle, but they are in that lifestyle because it gives them some things that we just do not understand. Maybe it is a spirit of belonging, somewhere to hang, some excitement, some things to do. We do not understand that type of stuff. We do not go into that type of stuff. But all of us in the community can pull them out of there. And I want to give credit to the Brothers of Bermuda, who reached out to employers about a week ago and said, I challenge you all, hire one person extra. We can do that. We can do that. We can look at ways to get people into a lifestyle that is sustainable. And to those out there in the community who say, Well, you know what? I don’t want to do that job because it doesn’t pay enough. But if you do not have a job and you are staying at Mama’s house or Grandma’s house, you have to start somewhere. So all the employers out there, look at it. See what you can do to help. And I will take this opport unity also to comment a little bit about the Immigration challenge that MP from constituency 31 had, Mr. Crockwell. I looked into that matter, and I am comfor table that Immigration did everything by the book. And if there was any interference, I would have made the decision that was required. But we cannot have our cake and eat it, too. If we want to protect our borders and we want assurance that there is opportunity for Bermudians, we cannot complain when Immigration is acting on com-plaints made by B ermudians. You have to allow them to do their job. If they do not do it in the right way, yes, do what you have to do. But if we are going to protect our borders and protect Bermudians, we have to deal with these complaints. And so I say to those employer s out there who are trying to circumvent the laws, we will not ease up on you. We put in strong policies to crack down on
Bermuda House of Assembly violations, and I know Minister Pat [Gordon- Pamplin] will make sure she follows through. Because those employers are not part of the o pportunity and the pr ogress we need to make, going forward. They hold us back. And there are many employers who can do a better job of giving Bermudians the opportunity. So I challenge employers tonight. Take someone on board. Train them on the job. Show t hem how to be productive, and do not make excuses. Many, many good employers do it up and down this country. And many of them come to my mind—Butterfield & Vallis, Flanagan’s restaurant, Hamilton Princess under their renovations. I challenge employers: Tak e Bermudians on, and you will find that you will be well served. Good evening. Thank you.
The Deputy SpeakerDeputy SpeakerThank you, Members. The House will reconvene on Wednesday, July the 13th , at 10:00 am. [Gavel] [At 11:57 pm, the House stood adjourned until 10:00 am, Wednesday, 13 July 2016.] 2474 8 July 2016 Official Hansard Report Bermuda House of Assemb ly [This page intentionally left blank]